and 6 with positive recommendation. >> supervisor, can i have a motion to not disclose what happened in closed session? >> so moved. >> no objection. motion passes. madam clerk, is there anything else on the agenda. >> no further business. >> if there's nothing further, the meeting is now adjourned. thank you very much.

>> vice president was great good evening and welcome to the wednesday, october 28, 2015, meeting of sfrldz the public defender e presiding officer is commissioner president ann lazarus joined by commissioner honda and commissioner fung and commissioner rick swig commissioner bobbie wilson that will absent this evening is robert ryan and at the controls the boards legal assistant cable car and i'm cynthia goldstein the board's executive director we're departments that have cases before this board. senior inspector, next item. >> joe duffy is sitting at the table in the front and representing the department of

building inspection and scott sanchez planning department who is zoning administrator and representing the planning commission and carli short with the department of public works with mapping and now the superintendent of urban forestry congratulation please be advised the ringing of and use of cell phones and other electronic devices are prohibited. out in the hallway. permit holders and others have up to 7 minutes to present their case and 3 minutes for rebuttal. people affiliated with these parties must conclude their comments within 7 minutes, participants not affiliated have up to 3 minutes - no rebuttal. to assist the board in the accurate preparation of the minutes, members of the public are asked, not required to submit a speaker card or business card to the clerk.

speaker cards and pens are available on the left side of the podium. the board welcomes your comments. there are customer satisfaction forms available. if you have a question about the schedule, speak to the staff after the meeting or call the board office tomorrow we are located at 1650 mission street, suite 304. this meeting is broadcast live on sfgovtv cable channel 78. dvds are available to purchase directly from sfgovtv. thank you for your attention. we'll conduct our swearing in process. if you intend to testify and wish to have the board give your testimony evidentiary weight, please stand and say i do. please note: any of the members may speak without taking

if you could stand now thank you do you solemnly swear or affirm the testimony you're about to give will be the whole truth and nothing but the truth? >> i do. >> okay. thank you very much commissioners we have one housekeeping item 8 which is appeal number. >> 1 dash 070 at cresting visiting the parties ask this be continued until november 4th, 2015, trying to workout a settle of their own we need a vote. >> so moved. >> thank you commissioner fung by public comment on item 8 seeing none, on that motion from commissioner fung to move this to november 4th commissioner president lazarus commissioner honda and with commissioner wilson

absent that motion carries moving to item one general public comment anyone that wants to address the board on items not on tonight agenda is there anyone from the public that wishes to speak under general public comment seeing none, move to item 2 commissioners questions or comments. >> commissioners i'm sorry. >> (inaudible) yes general public comment if you have something to say now is your chance. >> (inaudible). >> i see this is actually not item one we'll get to that in a few minutes thank you item 2 commissioners that is

questions or comments anything okay. so seeing none, move to item 3 the consideration of the october 14, 2015, board minutes. >> commissioners any additions, deletions, or changes if not may i have a motion. >> so moved. >> thank you. >> is there any public comment on the minutes seeing none, on the minutes we have a motion to do you want them by the vice president on that motion commissioner fung commissioner president lazarus and commissioner swig that that motion carries so, now move to item number 4 is a jurisdiction request the subject property on santa fe after the board received a whatever requester asking the board take jurisdictions over the permit application which was

issued onion may 2015 did appeal ended on may 15th and it was filed on august in 2015 the permit holder and to remove two living spaces on the first floor commercial step forward and rove the store the 1 floor street unit to be returned to commercial pace space for conditional use application the board voted with commissioner swig to continue this to allow the times for the permit for the permit holder to provide intention with respect to the permit on october 14th this matter was continued to tonight because of a loss of quorum and before we begin commissioner swig i believe you've received

union street the file and video and ready to participated thank you so much so commissioner president lazarus i was going to do suggest to hear from the permit holder first and since you've asked him to come back to speak to the board and hear from the departments and requester so if you'd like to come forward thank you and 3 minutes. >> yes. >> okay. you'll have 3 minutes. >> kevin tread well. >> could you speak into the other microphone. >> i'm kevin i pulled the permit at the request of the owner he is the new owner the building and part of progress of taking ownership was to be sure that the property was code compliant so it shows that - and please

overhead. >> there we go. >> you can use the other microphone swing that over. >> figure it out so this building was built in the 19 hundred and has been a commercial at street level both 663 and 665 for a number of years since the 1980s when was was allowed a commercial non-compliant commercial use the owner purchased it earlier this year and the fitting parts on 663 was still active commercial space somewhere along the line in the last few years the downstairs of 5665 was

converted to living space without permits those two rooms. >> i'm sorry you need to speak into the meek as you're working with that. >> those rooms are illegal bedrooms one the reasons besides not permitted there is no way to create an egress window in this space there was other issues that we were perfectly happy to capri with to make the building code compliant so getting the permit i've talked with the building permits and verbiage was added to make sure it was clear to return to commercial used by the city i was told that wouldn't be an issue we then

received the letter from the residents so as you can see from the way the building is built this being the front the street side of the property there really isn't any way to put in a legal bedroom in this property without a major renovation to the ground floor. >> so the intent to remove the illegal rooms and eventually turn it back to commercial space. >> thank you. >> mr. sanchez. >> let me ask a question first, the reason this case was continued the first time was there was a document in the brief that indicated the permit holder was withdrawing this

permit; is that correct or not correct. >> there was an initial thought to do that i stated but pulled that we realized it was not necessary to remove the permit there was a discussion i actually filed it and went back the next morning in discussion it was better to move forward as it was originally submitted. >> okay sorry thank you. >> mr. sanchez. >> thank you scott sanchez planning department one of the reasons this item was continued to get more clarity to confirm the permits were issued correctly and building the planning department reviewed that and no notice was required for the smubt permit i'm available to answer any questions. >> so just a question that

from the property has not been commercial for how many years would it require a conditional use. >> it has been abandon for the conditional use authorization would be needed to restore it this permit application didn't require that it seems of the two spaces one of them the side with the printing seems to be active within the last 3 years and the odds 3 years since a commercial use and need to establish the location. >> we haven't determined it. >> based on the information and the print shop i believe earlier this year and for the other space it was stated in an e-mail three years ago. >> so that is based to rare

conditional use to restore to commercial use. >> it is legal non-conforming. >> not typical permitted in the commercial use anulnar limited use can continue with restrictions. >> thank you mr. sanchez. >> thank you mr. duffy. >> good evening, commissioners joe duffy dbi short the permit seems to be reviewed properly by dbi i checked on complaints no active complaints so it is voluntary work and as i said, i didn't see anything wrong with the permit. >> thank you. >> okay. thank you mr. white

horn. >> good evening madam president and commissioners i'm here to contest the permit granted to joseph he never got a notice and when of the application was submitted a requirement of sf 311 and state law requires the landlord notice the tenants before applying for the permit the gentleman never contacted me and let me know he was seeking for a demolition which had i known would have done a block block notice he's returning this to a commercial space co-authored to the assessors those office a rh2 family 4 unit

building two distinct address my address and the address next door to me the address right next door to me basing has been a typically space for the landlord son for a number of years he moved out as the property was purchased by mr. bravo. >> it's a apartment where we live when you first walk in is a living room a long hallway my roommates room a kitchen my room a bathroom and a backdoor to a garden upon receiving the permit the landlord is supposed to accelerate the neighbors the permits was granted no such permit was granted thank you very much. >> no such sign has been

posted so on. >> any public comment on this item? seeing none, commissioners, the matter is submitted. >> mr. sanchez if you don't mind addressing the issue of the required notices please. over the course scott sanchez planning department so as discussed in other case pursuant to the planning code is not required for the removal of the twenl eastbound only required for a legal dwelling unit that has authorization the 3-r report listed this as a single-family detrimental and pending legislation that could expand the planning code 317 requirement for loss of dwelling units to also unit not authorized as today, the law

currently on applies to legal units and we have to evidence the lower floors of this building a legally dwelling units. >> where is that legislation. >> it has been introduced by commissioner avalos following up open interim controls h he has introduced and i believe the planning commission will be hearing it in december. >> oh, i don't think there is a basis for a jurisdiction request. >> under the current provision. >> well, i mean there is no basis in terms of whether the city erred the question of whether affordable housing disappears is less of a legal

issue. >> unfortunately, we seem since i've been on the commission it seems like every two weeks a similar situation a citizen is evicted from their illegal highway but until the board of supervisors takes our advise in april. >> around that time. >> unfortunately, our the situation to situation whereas, madam president said this doesn't merit the request. >> this is a little bit different than cases before us that a lot of cases before us are single-family dwellings that have not one or worn the legal units down look at the picture of the property this was

commercial space and although it is unfortunate i don't believe there is a basis for to grant the jurisdiction request. >> anyone. >> i'm in agreement. >> i'll move to deny the jurisdiction request on the basis there was no action by even though city it caused the requester inform internal revenue late thank you on that motion commissioner fung commissioner vice president honda and commissioner swig that motion carries 4 to zero. >> before i call the next item we want to find out if lilly lynn is here or an interpreter for the next item. >> okay t the for the next item yes. okay

we had hired on interpreter to come to help with that translate this item but she's - are you lilly lynn. >> yeah. >> okay. just in time ross those are the people that many say lynn is here to translate for you. >> okay. >> so i'm calling item 5 appeal lynn wong versus the a penalty for construction work without a permit and we will start with the appellant mr. wong who has 7 minutes to aid the board you need to come up to the microphone together. >> to present your case to the

board. >> and actually because we have an interpreter we'll double the time it will be a total of 14 minutes because of fact we're speaking through an interpreter so into the microphone please go forward. >> (speaking foreign language.) >> i speak chinese so i talk to you in chinese i any bedroom has 4 windows. >> (speaking foreign language.) >> yeah total 4 windows 3 of them is leaking water i change it. >> (speaking foreign language.) >> i don't know should i get

appointment from the window to fix. >> would you speak into the microphone i can't hear you thank you. >> i total have 4 windows 3 of them is leaking water do i need a permit now a leaking problem. >> (speaking foreign language.) >> right now. >> (speaking foreign language.) >> okay right now i still have my upstairs has a 6 to 8 windows their leaking water do i need to get a permit.

>> (speaking foreign language.) >> previously downstairs was living room for students he or she has a lot of opinion regarding to a lot of problem like leaking gas but i don't have leaking gas problem. >> (speaking foreign language.) >> i don't have a leaking gas and then he is unreasonable. >> (speaking foreign language.) >> and then my downstairs has lots of things i called my attorney he asked me to pay $10 he's asking for 10 to 15

thousand dollars. >> (speaking foreign language.) >> this person wants to say something if not no fact his purpose to get money back. >> (speaking foreign language.) >> yeah. the person even though wart has mold on the wart and -- excuse-me. i need to

repeat last sentence. >> (speaking foreign language.) >> and then talked to accountant after and investigated and the accountant said i need to look at it, it is fine. >> (speaking foreign language.) >> and then the government say i need to bring the wart and i left her not on the wart and open the door but refused to open the door i county get in to

>> (speaking foreign language.) >> because the time it limit to the government requested me before the may 29 i need to fix it before that day and after that i need to fix it to it is okay. right now. >> (speaking foreign language.) >> that person he has no furniture only one bed i give him like a bell or something for him to use he refused to return it to me. >> (speaking foreign language.) >> excuse me. the interpreter

for client. >> (speaking foreign language.) >> that person say he say we want to kill my family member. >> (speaking foreign language.) >> and i don't building what that person like thirty-year-old he is very, very bis very, very >> (speaking foreign language.) >> thank you our temporary can tell you about that information. >> i have a few questions how long has the tenant been in the

property. >> (speaking foreign language.) >> he is saying to stay about a few a couple of months and totally about 8 months and since march he didn't pay any rent. >> let me back up on that this is the appeal of a penalty for unpermitted work or is this tenant landlord issue. >> (speaking foreign language.) >> i won't yeah.

>> (speaking foreign language.) >> i just want to tell you i already make an appointment to fix the window and then previous landlord he said his house only costs thirty thousand and for the property tax only one hundred and 50. >> (speaking foreign language.) >> and downstairs already have open and bedroom i didn't do that. >> honk has the owner of this

property. >> (speaking foreign language.) >> i bought it in 1996. >> (speaking foreign language.) >> the house is very, very old and the property is very old so it has a lot of holes and the mouse comes through. >> thank you, thank you. >> thank you. >> thank you inspector duffy. >> you can sit now and we'll hear in the inspector and there's more time. >> commissioners joe duffy dbi the appeal the penalty is the result of the complaint received by dbi around the ninth of

march. >> inspector duffy hold on i want to make sure your translating this they need to understand this. >> it was the description of the complainant saying illegal unit and the rental services around march and it was phone calls barbara hale a no entry and around the 25th of march an inspection of the premises and some permit researchers by housing inspection services the 29 of april 2015 a initiation or over a parking garage and a failed inspection of the upper lower and kitchen counters and sing and enclosing

it with the kitchen and full bath a tube and sink have been added the permit research failed to produce any permits were issued throughout the building to its present condition and the following codes violations there is various code vacationed proper ventilation and heat source and installed without a wiring permit and back up instruction materials and improper exist egress obstruction the rules of violation was issued by the housing inspection at a time the instruction was to submit a copy and two sets of plans with wants building application to legalize the

floor occupancy or reinvestor back to the use there was a 9 minds penalty of 5 thousand dollars the value of work to be 5 thousand dollars and that was noigs noigs the value of $1,000 but had a discussion they lowered that to 4 thousand 9 times to $15,000 of work and lastly thousand dollars the subsequent building permit during the process it was filed on the cigarette of august and issued and the permit was to

comply with the notice of violation with one half bath and replace the walls in the garage with two doors with the fire rated door and remove the kitchen the value of work on that permit was $26,000 during the process of approval on that permit the penalty was put on for 9 times on a value of 5 thousand dollars on the totals penalties assessed by dbi was for one thousand $4.01 that is where we're at here and i would be saying the penalty that dbi wants the 9 times penalty to stay i did not get if the gentleman that owns the property did the work i'm not clear but i certainly seems fair enough the penalties was fair and if, in fact, they got a reductions of 15 thousand to 5

thousand take that 66 percent of penalty over $3,000 from the penalty stuck so i'm available to answer any questions i think if i have to expand. >> the penalty mentioned nothing about windows. >> that's a separate issue. >> they're not clear if they need a permit to pay so some appeal the penalty for the work that i mean windows with regards to the windows needs a permit and obviously the building of the unit matters i'm not sure if this gentleman was responsible for po that but owned it since 1996. >> his statement says he didn't do the work. >> he didn't. >> that's what his statement

says. >> our permit if it is done by a previous owner we'll reduce the penalty in dbi there's a code section it addresses that i don't know it didn't include the penalty by housing inspection services this which is standard procedure sometimes, people appeal those through the deputy could directors or the chief housing inspection not sure they use it is to be honest when i'm doing these things people came in and got the permit first and did the work i'm not sure. >> a side question does an anonymous complaint trigger a certification. >> we're going by city charter

we respond to every complaint and it gets assigned to an inspector do we get in no nonetheless we see a duplicate we know that is something we've looked at recently. >> okay. thank you i'm sorry other question any public comment on this item? okay. seeing none then mr. wong you have 3 minutes of rebuttal if you want to speak again to the board. >> public? >> is there any rebuttal?

please step forward. >> i will set the clock for 6 minutes again to double the time. >> (speaking foreign language.) >> before march 29 i already knew the work no good i definitely asked that person to pin the wart he didn't want me to get in. >> (speaking foreign language.) >> i bought everything to painting i still fixing any house i tried to go inside to

bring the wall. >> i'm sorry can i interrupt one second so this hearing is for the penalty phase it is not in regards to the tenant landlord dispute so what it is about duty the penalty imposed on him. >> (speaking foreign language.) >> basically is there a reason we shouldn't charge him one thousand dollars. >> (speaking foreign language.) >> i don't understand why you guys give penalty for me that's why i do not understand >> (speaking foreign language.) >> because i'm online

downstairs? >> (speaking foreign language.) >> i living downstairs about two years. >> (speaking foreign language.) and then when i left town nothing happen 33 and even my wife emigrated here from china she lived with us downstairs and then nothing happened. >> (speaking foreign language.) >> i know. >> can i. >> - >> can i maybe he is confused. >> the reason why he is here and the penalties is caused because there was work performed on his property without the correct permitting.

>> (speaking foreign language.) >> he also, they don't speak inclines. >> i'm sorry >> (speaking foreign language.) >> because i don't speak everyone i don't know english we're low income family so that's why we bought this every we're low income family so that's why we bought thineveryo we're low income family so that's why we bought this gleve english we're low income family so that's why we bought this ie english we're low income family so that's why we bought thishev english we're low income family so that's why we bought this ve english we're low income family so that's why we bought thieryo english we're low income family so that's why we bought thiryon

english we're low income family so that's why we bought thiyoneh we're low income family so that's why we bought thione i d we're low income family so that's why we bought thine i do we're low income family so that's why we bought this e i d we're low income family so that's why we bought this i do we're low income family so that's why we bought this >> (speaking foreign language.) >> because we don't speak worker we know to ask forgive permit since we bought a house that is having a bathroom. >> (speaking foreign language.) >> but. >> we have total 4 people we fixed that problem and lived together. >> (speaking foreign language.) >> yeah. then we pay like one hundred dollars to fix the problem. >> (speaking foreign language.) >> yeah, we fix - yeah, we fix our wall we changed it up the wood and then we can live inside. >> okay. when you purposed the property did the realtor speak chinese? >> (speaking foreign language.)

>> yes. >> so it is california state law that everything be disclosed on the properties condition when they purchased the property in the 6 it was explained to them at a time the area and stove and windows and bashl were illegal that is buyer be aware. >> (speaking foreign language.) >> we don't know because we don't know english so that's why when we bought the house i don't know exactly. >> (speaking foreign language.) >> 33 and then we fix the

problem and right now your giving me a penalty right now it is unreasonable. >> (speaking foreign language.) >> because of that like the little mouse coming through we tried to fix problem. >> (speaking foreign language.) >> yeah, that's example we try to fix it and - and then people tells us you fix it and looks like it is beautiful then people say maybe you try tee rent it out. >> (speaking foreign language.) >> so this is the fact. >> (speaking foreign language.) >> yeah, because we tried to fix the problem and effectually we fixed the problem you guys want to give me the penalty. >> (speaking foreign language.) >> yeah, because we have

inside we tried to fix it we just want to live in our home. >> (speaking foreign language.) >> we don't know we need to get a permit who can fix it we don't know english that's why we bought. >> house. >> sorry do they have any children. >> children. >> (speaking foreign language.) >> yes. >> we have 3. >> do they speak english. >> (speaking foreign language.) >> they were - >> (speaking foreign language.) >> they were born here but they a lot of times they were very, very young they go to school. >> all right. is your time up. >> one is in sacramento. >> their college age at this point. >> (speaking foreign language.) >> some say all right graduated and some is in school.

>> thank you. >> we need to pay the tuition fee. >> can i ask the name of the other speaker please in the other speaker. >> (speaking foreign language.) >> if you could fill out a card for her that would be helpful a speaker card the little card thank you. >> sir, is there still time or is it finished? >> are you done are they done speaking to the board. >> (speaking foreign language.) >> that's all yeah. >> we still need to pay for the tuition for our children and then you want to give me the penalties you can that is

unreasonable; right? >> (speaking foreign language.) >> yeah in san francisco a lot of people living like this asian and a lot of people are low income families. >> yeah. i feel it is unreasonable yeah. >> (speaking foreign language.) >> yeah, because in person right now they shouldn't he was a chiropractor he come to our place twice to ask for living. >> thank you your time is up. >> inspector duffy a rebuttal? >> sorry commissioners not too much to add it appears someone

acted to get the permit the description if there were a sets of plans that would have been better for the agent to pull the permit and explain that better to them i'm not sure the total fees 2 thousand plus the penalty is only one thousand they're making one hundred dollars they're appropriately assessed so it is difficult with the understanding the vision and is penalty i'm not sure that everybody they understand it but it says someone acted on their on behalf of to comply to the notice of violation so i don't think it is those folks maybe if that person had of been here. >> that was the $10,000.

>> sorry. >> possibly. yes. your probability right. >> may we ask them the owner who i agree - >> may we ask them who is professional who that was that might have been easier. >> i didn't say it was the second part as i said the discussion somewhere along the line 9 times reduced to someone had that discussion with dbi we don't do that nonetheless you come in and sit down and have that conversation. >> so it's been reduced already. >> i saw on the housing nose on complaints there was a reduction from 9 time to 15 to 9 times and 5 i don't think that

was those people but who was getting the permit. >> i believe the patents son that came to file the appeal but not able to attend oh, sorry. >> he's here. >> (laughter). kind of too late >> are they're questions for him. >> can you step to the podium please. i wish you would have dove in there earlier, you heard the explanation they're basically here because a certifying so we listened to for the last 20 minutes is a tenant landlord dispute. >> i saw the drawings i put everything i did that because my

parents couldn't afford an architect. >> a couple of questions so when they bought the property the in-law unit was present correct. >> based on the case i don't remember what they told me is what i know. >> what it rent during that time. >> no, it was not. >> vacant the whole time. >> my mom's mom came from china. >> this was the first time that was rented with that tenant and yes. >> and your tennis to remove the illegal unit. >> yeah. they can't afford they spoke to 3 contractors i spoke to them and they gave us bids from 60 to $100,000. >> do you know because of the new legislation that was enacted of october of 2014 i can add a

non-common but once you roach you it you can't readd. >> my parents can't say take out a loan we attempted to fill out the legalization form but due to the cost and that we have to hire an architect i cannot do the drawings and have to hire another contractor for electrical and one more plumbing and one inform some other things it is too expensive. >> the other thing looking at the paper paperwork that was submitted the department of building inspection has reduces is penalties i understand your parents are limited english when they purchased the property in the 6 their realtor spoke inclines at this point it it was dlordz that was an illegal unit

and if it was not disclosed you should bring up that paperwork with that realtor. >> i tried to do before i tried to get the drawings we have this report i attempted to pull when i tried to pull the report you can't read it, it is for the legible at all what i looked at the drawings that was a 27 unit apartment. >> anyone else have any questions. >> please state your name for the record. >> kenny wang. >> commissioners unless other questions commissioners, the matter is submitted. >> i guess i'll start unfortunate situation we are now going to lose oath affordable unit in the city but i think that the department of building inspection looking at the

paperwork has bebeen very fair in their estimation of the fees that were charged unless other comments the amount is a fair. >> i'll probably disagree with that a little bit the history of our decisions in these types of cases normal from the property owner did not install it then we give them some latitude and break on this the question in this case is that i accept what they said in terms of not renting it for that many years they started to rent is that created other issues for them so there was income generation but since they didn't

do it i'll recommend perhaps we reduce it to 5 times instead of 9 times. >> i agree with commissioner fung question. >> move to grant the appeal and to reduce the penalties to 5 times. >> that's 5 times the permit fee on the commission motion to grant the appeal and reduce the penalties to 5 times the permit fee on the basis it was done by a prior owner. >> yes. it is based on the reduced valuation permit fee. >> the reason for reducing it is what i'm asking. >> yes. mr. duffy you want to correct any math?

>> sorry commissioners just normally the penalty is 9 times the penalties of the work performed we'll reduce to 5 times not the permit fee the proper you know there's fees that are correctly assessed. >> that's correct. >> so it is 9 - 5 times the penalty. >> yeah. on the penalty yeah. >> so commissioner fung i'm asking for the basis of that reduction the reason. >> on the basis they did not create the unpermitted work. >> i notice one more thing to the presidio's that i heard some financial stuff being spoken they can't afford it this work needs to get done to contrary the notice of violation or more costs there are will be a hearing and assessment costs i

hope maybe i can pertain that to them but it is important they follow through and get a final inspection so it didn't get more expensive. >> can we, huh? - can you give us a calculation from the penalty is currently sitting at. >> one thousand. >> one thousand. >> so this will approximately go 6 hundred. >> yes. >> be clear on that i agree with our advise and given there is their son is in the room and he seems to be an intelligent young man and does things i don't know how to do i highly recommend he provides council to his parents with our good advice and speak to the son. >> okay. >> who will understand. >> thank you, commissioners. >> we have a motion from

commissioner fung to reduce the penalty to 5 times of the value performed commissioner president lazarus commissioner vice president honda and commissioner swig okay that motion carries move on to item 6 appeal elizabeth sale and matthew versus the department of public works on ninth avenue protesting the network of inc. for a wireless box for a construction of the wireless facility that was heard on october 7, 2015, and continued by the board to allow the time for the notification materials and commissioner president lazarus i was going to ask if you want to hear from the department first and hear from the presidio's and the appellant. >> yes. and so starting with ms. short. >> are the appellants here.

>> i don't know. >> are the appellants heeler ms. sale and mr. gaffe new. >> good evening carli short public works i don't have anything to add i'm available to answer any questions well, i duo have one thing to add we have proposed a revised order that would require notification on both those in the future we felt the proper notification was done in this case i'll be happy to answer any questions. >> was it the materials. >> they provided. >> i'm sorry. >> it is - >> yeah. okay. >> thank you. >> okay and congratulations again. >> mr. fineman. >> 3 minutes. >> hi - good evening madam

president and honorable members of the board of the appeals i'm martin fineman on behalf of the castle west known in the paperwork and a as the network of california and that entities it the permit holder the permit was properly grandstanded pursuant to article 25 of the code and the regulations under that implementing that part of public works codes as you may know the protest was filed and heard and denied and final approval was given of this permit and an appeal was taken up a few weeks ago as ms. goldstein mentions and the matter put over for today to allow the department of

public works to submit prove that proper notice was given the department of public works did provide that documentation to the board on october 13th 2015 as to the merits of that case, i would note i guess it's been noted the appellants are not presents that is consistent with the fact that although they filed an appeal not a brief in support of the appeal prior to the last hearing nor in other papers in between the only ground that was mentions in that one-package document the original notice of appeal was concerns about radio frequency emissions the board is aware and bryan indicated to the board singles the prior hearing at the time of the prior hearing federal law and specifically refer to section 332 of the

title 47 of the u.s. code part of the telecommunications act forbids the city and/or county or state to deny the permit for the wireless facilities based on any concerns regarding radio frequency emissions moving of moving beyond that castle conformed with the city's requirement regarding the emissions as you may know from the record a submit to the report from a qualified professional engineer the facility compiles with the standards it does see and in fact, the maps allows the emissions on one percent of accountable frequency because of notice issue that was on the boards minded was addressed i

object to speak to any questions that the board might have. >> okay. >> anyone here on behalf of the appellants? >> seeing none, any public comment on many item commissioners, the matter is submitted. >> >> question for ms. short. >> i assume that was one of the accurate permits. >> that's right. >> thank you. >> well, i'll start ought to be consistent i think that the permit was issued if error and equipment on both poles and radius should ethics commission have gone out to one 50 radius of both locations the department reflects the first one. >>was issued in error.

>> is there a motion? >> what would it be? >> remember back to the definition of what required notice in the type equipment they said that the what was it the - charge or something didn't have to be noticed. >> it was ambiguous regarding the equipment that on one pole they felt it was only specific - >> units. >> a battery. >> battery pack yeah. >> yeah. >> so the primary equipment

those was on one pole. >> so far as i am concerned, it is one pole. >> can you help me director. >> you're asking to grant the appeal and deny the permit on the basis the notice was defective; is that correct. >> thank you. >> then we have that motion by the vice president commissioner fung no. >> commissioner president lazarus. >> no commissioner swig there's a vote of 2 to 2 on that motion so that fails bargaining any other motions the permit will be absolved by default. >> do you want to carry it over for additional - >> commissioners will not make a difference only 4 votes to the

motion. >> sorry. >> okay. >> so move on to the next item appeal rosemary versus the department of building inspection with the planning department powerful protesting the issuance to gregory and ann of an entertainment commission permit to construct changes to front stairs and reconfigure the stairs to stairs of landing the hearing was held on july 2015 and on for further consideration today, the matter was continued to allow the permit holder to prepare the consolidated plans and commissioners those plans are in our packet and my understanding is the party have reached on agreement noted 100 percent se but representative from each side to step forward and address the board on the

agreement they would like you to help them do yoadopt. >> hi my name is matthew representing gregory and ann can as of this week we came into a agreement with rose on a couple different items regarding this permit we've consolidated the plans reviewed them with a couple members of planning including scott sanchez and come to an agreement of the restrictions with rose and as far as we understand we're in agreement on those aspects the primary thing is just making sure that dpw reviews the stair.

>> good evening. i'm rose the property owner on fifth after the adjacent property we did review the plans and have a plan i believe that meets the city planning requirement as well as my moaning own a concern about the as built stairwell it encroaches on public sidewalks so the reason for the asking dpw with whoever the appropriated agency within the city planning or inspectors to look at before the plans are updated to make sure no improvement on the public sidewalks as in the stairwell and as noted the plans upon the plans, however, i do want to call out in may of 2014 we did

also agree upon a set of plans the concerns were brought up in the last appeal hearing was that the execution of those plans did not conform to what was in the plans in terms of what was built was vast different than in the plan and covered in great detail at the last hearing the important point wife agreed on a plan and time to make sure we execute those plans and the only caveat to the plan to commence the work to make sure that stairwell was positioned now is not on public space. >> thank you. >> and thank you for working things out. >> this agreement is based on the plans submitted to us? >> yeah. >> i want to ask the first

speaker provide us with a speaker card so we have your name shall we hear in the department mr. sanchez anything on this. >> scott sanchez planning department the department has no problem with the revised plans revised plans are code compliant and not being built according to the plan we expect what was matched with the plan and be informing with the code and plans and in particular the issues related to the permit of the doorway it should be built and if that is the cased we'll be okay. >> thank you mr. sanchez. >> mr. duffy. >> joe duffy dbi i did have a discussion with respond that he

dbi current member someone representing the permit holder and the encroachment on the sidewalk came up that was something that the dpw will deal with it is into the public sidewalks the permits got reviewed by at finally by clinton a ground checker and have inspectors if it is encroached dpw will have an issue. >> is there a notation for them to be aware. >> the plans were inside the property line not anything on there but dpw signed off required prior to dbi so dpw will need to sign off prior to the dbi board of directors on the main permit in 2013 an issued permit not signed off yet

i'm not sure but the appellant could let dpw know that there would be potentially an issue okay. >> so what i'm hearing is that the current as built stairway was not to the built but has been built is currently encroaching on the public right-of-way. >> that's what their claiming. >> so what do we do formally or who does it formally to make a request to dpw to do a survey to share assure that the current as built stairway is not encroaching on the public right-of-way. >> it could come from dbi or the appellant. >> what is your suggestion

because your objection before and what kind of rank my bell a little bit was note earlier and that is the it was kind of ran glad building the plans were one thing and the structure turned out to be something sixth different so we had the option i believe to ask the owner of the building to tear the whole thing down so i think it would be appropriate for us to assure on behalf of the appellant and the neighbor that one it gets built according to plan but two we request proper action to make sure that dpw does a survey to

protect public interests. >> that's fine i believe that the plans are i believe showing all the work within the property line but we can certainly i mean dpw needs to go out and inspector that before dbi those are most permits with garages and part of progress and probably i could take it upon myself to contact the gentleman and make sure that it was - as strong inside the property line and not on the public way there may be a way to allow that i mean a matter of encroachment i don't know that is not example they got approved. >> i would feel for comfortable the board is protecting the public interest by insuring that when something

is built at and according to plans and according to what we approve and did not invade the public space and i totally agree yeah. >> i would add the following commissioners that the weather action this board takes if it is acceptable to this board then those documents would not have to be that any type of motion to continue with the permit and to its finalization the permit documents that are included shows within the property line yeah. >> i'm only addressing the one issue not the issue of whether it was serial permitting or something else that was going to

be determined by dpw they still have to sign off the other issue of whether conforms to the document now, some scrutiny brought to that i have no comment on whether the issue of renegade buildings is an issue. >> okay. thank you. >> the most. >> first any. >> sorry. >> that's okay. no public comment and you have a last comment or a question. >> yeah. >> we did actually ask the permit holder to include the as built drawings they denied that saying that was not required for the permit to be approved by city planning so i don't know

from the prrlz has the jurisdiction in terms of how this plan is executed we have reached terms and with all due respect we've tried to engage him in the process that led up to the structure of this today so i guess the real concern i have as the neighbor and the public just whatever we need to do to insure that the plans and permits are executed in terms of guidance or oversight from this board and we do have additional photos we didn't include another piece was not to be submitted but i think the other picture in the packet clearly show a clear possibility what is already there not in conformity with the

submitted plans. >> again i'll ask from the board to know how they'll provide oversight or make sure that is executed correctly. >> island i'll add the department of dbi will have the responsibility to make sure that is conforming to what is submitted in not conformed then they'll have to file a permit additional be repealed and jurisdiction maintained by this board okay. >> question. >> so if you wish to adopt this request from the parties you'll have to grant the appeal and issue the permit with the revised plan and state a reason because the parties have reached an agreement. >> sounds good to me. >> is that your motion. >> that's my motion and to be

specific this is the revised plans october 21st, 2015, on that motion by the president commissioner fung commissioner honda. >> commissioner swig thank you very much commissioners that motion carries then item 8 has been continued to november 4th so we're on to item 9 versus this zoning administrator the property on 650 protesting the issuance on september 23rd of a letter of determination the current legal use is a two residential building not established at the property we'll start with the appellants 7 minutes to present our case weather is going to speak step forward. >> good evening.

>> i have 650 i've been having a meeting since 1989 been there forever as far as i, 3 rb one flat and one commercial i want to make sure this is i want to continue with the same thing we check on the paperwork was something diflt different i want to make sure we stay commercial and community facility and continue with our meeting place. >> that's what i'm since we've been using it since 1989. >> do you have a business permit indicates that you've been urges that capability. >> i have the leases for the tenants they didn't have the business permit i didn't follow but my own permit.

>> who is in control of the space under discussion are you the owner and do you control it in that - >> i'm the owner. >> you're the owner. >> yes. >> does anybody lease it for a business purchase. >> yes. >> so ask there any permit that it is leased for the and there is a permit as a business. >> i have the lease what they rents it for . >> is anyone representing our tenants here this evening. >> i have the letter they were renting for all this time. >> okay. thank you. >> if you want to see the leases but i have. >> okay. thank you. >> you provided copies of that are you finished with our presentation ma'am.

>> do you have anything else. >> mines the room in the back and the upstairs and the commercial in the front i'm confused on the what i have it in the city i want to fix it to continue to use it commercial the fronts community facility either with the backroom or without the backroom the commercial and the upstairs house the flat. >> thank you. >> you've owned this. >> yes. >> for a long time and yes. >> did you recollect ref the two notices talking about non-conforming commercial sent to you by two different zoning administrator's. >> we never saw anything no paper nothing this came to our way to know.

>> but you've eendz this property. >> we've owned this property for a long time yeah. >> 7 or 8. >> thank you thank you. we kept using it as commercial we didn't know. >> thank you and you can take those papers with you. >> mr. sanchez. >> thank you scott sanchez planning department i think the facts in this case are clear we outlined them clearly in your letter of determination the subject property was originally a single-family dwelling above ground level commercial the space was a non-conforming use with the provisions the blood the planning code in 19 that 8 the planning department and mr. steel sent a notice to the property owner of the termination date and the status

non-conforming status was termed in february of 1993 the then zoning administrator issued a letter which has the materials regarding the building permit and the letter states the non-residential space of the ground floor can't be retained it was expired and the letter states the property is for residential dwelling units in an rh2 zoning district that didn't permit the commercial use the ground floor area can't be used for a commercial laundry and dry sclaern or other industrial uses and that was approved and issued to legalize ground floor a second dwelling unit on the property in addition to the building permit that was substantially renewed and completed a notice of special

refresh my recollection was recorded on the deed avenue property by the property owner stating that the legal use of property was either a two family twenl this was recorded in the assessors officer by the property owner on the deed of their property preempting restricting and noticing the use is only a two family typically with no commercial use again recorded by the property owner on the property so under the planning code under the building permit the notice of special restrictions a illegal a two single dwelling they're seeking to remove that whether or not it was used as a dwelling unit over the years but they're seeking to remove a dwelling unit through their actions and restore a commercial use where one is not allowed to

exist so it is clear we have the documents that were submitted and i'm available to answer any questions thank you. >> they're asking to remove a dwelling unit or add a experimental to two dwelling units. >> based on the arguments this is only a single-family dwelling no this of. >> no, no my question is she brought up alternatives she could go to one with between and one commercial unit i wasn't sure whether this meeting room occupied the entire ground floor or partially. >> the property owner a can explain that but there is no local use of community room that was noted in the zoning administrator's decision in

19933 that building permit in the review we don't have evidence of that legally on the ground floor. >> mr. sanchez how do the that come about a complaint. >> the gentleman requested a letter of depreciation that was unifying provoked by your department. >> what did you ask for . >> we respond to the letter of depreciation and issued the letters with the facts and attachment dozens of pages of them and that was appealed to this board. >> a followup question enforcement so f currently non-warranted non-used what happens if they continue to do so. >> we'll pursue enforcement double check our file not an actual complaint at a time yeah,

we'll then pursue enrollment. >> what would be the enforcement. >> their had been two enforcement cases on the property relate to unpermitted fences so nothing related to subject use and the enrollment process will state the legal use it a two go family typically they need to restore that and we'll pursue the enforcement that results to penalties up to $250 a day. >> thank you any public comment? >> you have rebuttal please step forward. >> i have one flat and the commercial downstairs and everybody in the secession inspector know me and my plays and it has been there a long time 27 years and never stopped me we want to continue to use the

community facility thank you and i appreciate your understanding it has not been residential only commercial i want to continue commercial you like to have more residents i could add another one i want to keep this one as a commercial i hope your understanding i'm helping the community too. >> i have a question the zoning administrator received the special restrictions you filed on the property do you recall those. >> notice of special restrictions maybe. >> when. >> 1993. >> which kind of a special restrictions. >> concerning the use of property. >> no, i don't know anything about that. >> well, you filed. >> what we understood the backroom and bath could be used as a unit and the commercial commercial so we have 3 that was said and he fixed it and we

continue to use is that way all those years. >> a residence on the first floor. >> room and a back and that will be - >> so it is a room and bath no kingdom kitchen. >> we're going to use it as a coffee area like an office. >> ms. goldstein will share this notice you don't recall. >> i have a question perhaps of the council our one lawyer is not here and a lease will not be described a lease you said you lease with someone.

>> not necessarily a contractual document. >> so notice to a party's all right. thank you. >> the business license would help but that's not disputed that would be helpful. >> it is independent of the site. >> no, i think they only indicate a use that was in place not necessarily that it is illegal. >> right. >> the paperwork for the record or the what he explained to us in the room in the back we could use it as as upstairs unit we kept on using it and everybody knows about it. >> thank you. >> okay is there more times left sir, you can speak. >> good evening thank you for this opportunity

state your name for the record. >> we didn't they especially\change the style of the building that front so the empowering is the same way since 20 or thirty years ago at the time they pulled the permit a problem in the plumbing and probably pulled the permit to fix the plumbing in the backroom they had to fix something that was why and someone explicit inform them or not clear the signing the paper maybe shift the way this property works if you look at the property it looks like commercial front ends we're not interested when they bought the property at the time thes they knew that was commercial that's the purpose of buying it they don't intend to open a grocery or restaurant to each year e keep it something to do with kids they're not interested in

making a brick and mortar business at this point thank you, ma'am. >> mr. sanchez. >> any rebuttal. >> thank you scott sanchez planning department so 1992 permit shows the entire ground floor as residential no commercial use at all the notice it it special restrictions is very explicit to that of the ground floor the entire ground floor being residential the property owner has innovates indicated otherwise the 3-r report are generated at the time of sale that's a code enforcement they've owned the property quite a long time they've said they have a 3-r report i've not seen

that there has been more half a dozen permits since the 1992 and all say 2 single-family dwelling the facts are clear in this case that is legally a two family building and based on this is no commercial use the legal commercial use was termed and subsequent to that the permit was sought to establish the between on the second floor as allowed by the zone and they accident see and filed a notice of special restrictions the property owner name in the document and yeah that's all i can say. >> mr. sanchez ii should have disclosed i went online to do a 365 and across the street is a building that looks like this and it looks

like a commercial grocery store why is that why was that grocery store do you think allowed to continue as the whole neighborhood and my understanding and my reading was rezoned to for bid that same thing. >> the planning code does allow for certain limited commercial use to be remained those are less intense retail used ligrocery stores so it is e limited provisions of the planning code that's been operated consistently and never sought a permit to convert it to the between in this case. >> the key phrase in our response to me serve the community which seems to me a thought which is being offered by the owner of the building and

what their intent to serve the community it also when i'm hearing also is that there was work done and the proper permit was initialed a contractor who is doing the work advised someone that was misinformed to sign this document here and give up all and clear you know that you're giving up the rights and then low and behold a decade or so later the property owner and i'd like to know why spontaneously wanted to clear the or make educators on the use they files

a piece of paper they're being pushed. >> what about the prior notifications and that's the hard part. >> a question for the da. >> in terms of neighborhood serving uses that a legally a between that is a neighborhood dwelling use on a daily basis basis losing dwelling units so i think that serves a reasonable function also in terms of the property owner sought a permit in 1992 that permit had on it establishing the legal use of ground floor as a residential use the notice of special restrictions is not something counter signed and they have to go personally to the assessors office to record on the deed of

property those conditions and pay a fee to do that typically so i think there is a process involved certainly the property owner can say whatever they're saying to you at the board but the fact are very clear about what has happened this is a legal unit as part of housing stock they're seeking to remove that and what their thrilling their goal to have this great neighborhoods serving function there's no permit before you to do that they were seeking to have that dwelling unit be removed be expunged from the record and at this point what any commercial use allowed will it be considered a limited use cafe maybe a usable the building has historically had uses the appearance in that case this is not thinking common in san

francisco in some cases people that take the uses and converted them to residential unit and a terrible persistence or preepsz to say someone went through the process decided they said or don't want to go through the proper process section 317 they can go ahead but not back to a commercial use this is a zoning district that doesn't have a lot of commercial uses i appreciate your clarity and your instruction and education of for me understand totally and clearly so - if they wanted to file if they wanted to sustain that as a

non-brick and mortar that is their terms retails use that is a cafe or anything but in - in fact, they wanted to establish it through the filing of that 317 a non-permanently non-retail use a.

>> but with conditional use authorization they could seek the conditional use authorization to have a legal use as part of that seat to have the dwelling unit removed. >> if we deny their appeal and they want to pursue that direction that would be the direction they will take not a closed book they still have the tubtsz to go back and be clear and specific non-retail use under the umbrella of a church or temple of a community-based situation. >> absolutely to declare a better determination responds to a specific question asked they especially\ask how they could establish an institutional use of property they i think the letter that was submitted had been in the absorption they were a limit commercial use and could restore

as a commercial use we clarified that in our letter. >> i punishment are appreciate our education of me and your advice and actually mr. sanchez. >> this boardunishment are ap our education of me and your advice and actually mr. sanchez. >> this boanishment are appre our education of me and your advice and actually mr. sanchez. >> this boaishment are apprec our education of me and your advice and actually mr. sanchez. >> this boashment are apprecir education of me and your advice and actually mr. sanchez. >> this boahment are apprecia education of me and your advice and actually mr. sanchez. >> this boaent are appreciate education of me and your advice and actually mr. sanchez. >> this boant are appreciate education of me and your advice and actually mr. sanchez. >> this boat are appreciate o education of me and your advice and actually mr. sanchez. >> this boa are appreciate ou education of me and your advice and actually mr. sanchez. >> this boaare appreciate our education of me and your advice and actually mr. sanchez. >> this boare appreciate our education of me and your advice and actually mr. sanchez. >> this boae appreciate our education of me and your advice and actually mr. sanchez. >> this boa appreciate our edn of me and your advice and actually mr. sanchez.

>> this boaappreciate our edu of me and your advice and actually mr. sanchez. >> this boards advertised a lever of determination overturned not allowed for use right. >> yes. >> in other words, it didn't the denial excuse me. the over turning of this finding didn't grant them necessarily the commercial use but has to go through the process. >> this is not an action, an is before this time but hospitals dwelling units depending on the boards decision if it finds this is legally not two dwelling units they will need to come in for a building permit to show it is two dwelling units and you know we'll have to go through the process we will want to consultant with the city attorney's office the best way to proceed and whether do a dr because the city's records shows it as two dwelling units. >> i understand all that i'm saying they're still additional process. >> yes. but i mean certainly i don't know what the basis of boards decision or direction. >> that's neither hooerl. >> to approve a permit that show see that is legally a use

we don't have on city records? >> i don't know what the expectation of the board to make a decision to overturn the recommendation and what it would be. >> i don't have any i don't intend to go that way. >> (laughter). >> he knows if i go that way i'll have an answer for him. >> thank you. >> commissioners, the matter is submitted. >> and just as a reminder under the standard. >> i'm prepared to make a motion. >> move to deny the appeal on the basis that the zoning administrator neither errored or used incorrect discretion. >> that motion commissioner fong commissioner vice president honda commissioner swig thank you that motion carries 34

to zero and commissioner president lazarus there's no further business. >> in that case we're adjourned. >>

as a society we've basically failed big portion of our population if you think about the basics of food, shelter safety a lot of people don't have any of those i'm mr. cookie can't speak for all the things but i know say, i have ideas how we can address the food issue. >> open the door and walk through that don't just stand looking out. >> as they grew up in in a how would that had access to good food and our parent cooked this

is how you feed yours this is not happening in our country this is a huge pleasure i'm david one of the co-founder so about four year ago we worked with the serviced and got to know the kid one of the things we figured out was that they didn't know how to cook. >> i heard about the cooking school through the larkin academy a. >> their noting no way to feed themselves so they're eating a lot of fast food and i usually eat whatever safeway is near my home a lot of hot food i was excited that i was eating lunch enough instead of what and eat. >> as i was inviting them over teaching them basic ways to fix

good food they were so existed. >> particle learning the skills and the food they were really go it it turned into the is charity foundation i ran into my friend we were talking about this this do you want to run this charity foundations and she said, yes. >> i'm a co-found and executive director for the cooking project our best classes participation for 10 students are monday they're really fun their chief driven classes we have a different guest around the city they're our stand alone cola's we had a series or series still city of attorney's office style of classes our final are night

life diners. >> santa barbara shall comes in and helps us show us things and this is one the owners they help us to socialize and i've been here about a year. >> we want to be sure to serve as many as we can. >> the san francisco cooking school is an amazing amazing partner. >> it is doing that in that space really elevates the space for the kids special for the chief that make it easy for them to come and it really makes the experience pretty special. >> i'm sutro sue set i'm a chief 2, 3, 4 san francisco. >> that's what those classes afford me the opportunity it breakdown the barriers and is this is not scary this is our choice about you many times this

is a feel good what it is that you give them is an opportunity you have to make it seem like it's there for them for the taking show them it is their and they can do that. >> hi, i'm antonio the chief in san francisco. >> the majority of kids at that age in order to get them into food they need to see something simple and the evidence will show and easy to produce i want to make sure that people can do it with a bowl and spoon and burner and one pan. >> i like is the receipts that are simple and not feel like it's a burden to make foods the cohesives show something eased. >> i go for vera toilet so

someone can't do it or its way out of their range we only use 6 ingredients i can afford 6 ingredient what good is showing you them something they can't use but the sovereignties what are you going to do more me you're not successful. >> we made a vegetable stir-fry indicators he'd ginger and onion that is really affordable how to balance it was easy to make the food we present i loved it if i having had access to a kitchen i'd cook more. >> some of us have never had a kitchen not taught how to cookie wasn't taught how to cook.

>> i have a great appreciation for programs that teach kids food and cooking it is one of the healthiest positive things you can communicate to people that are very young. >> the more programs like the cooking project in general that can have a positive impact how our kids eat is really, really important i believe that everybody should venting to utilize the kitchen and meet other kids their age to identify they're not alone and their ways in which to pick yours up and move forward that. >> it is really important to me the opportunity exists and so i do everything in my power to keep it that.

>> we'll have our new headquarters in the heart of the tenderloin at taylor and kushlg at the end of this summer 2014 we're really excited. >> a lot of the of the conditions in san francisco they have in the rest of the country so our goal to 257bd or expand out of the san francisco in los angeles and then after that who know. >> we'd never want to tell people want to do or eat only provide the skills and the tools in case that's something people are 2rrd in doing. >> you can't buy a box of psyche you have to put them in the right vein and direction with the right kids with a right place address time those kids don't have this you have to instill they can do it they're good enough now to finding out figure out and find the future

for >> >> >> >> good afternoon and welcome to the city and school district select meeting on october 22nd. i want to recognize members here today. we have commissioner haney and walton. supervisor david campos will be joining us shortly. i want to recognize or clerk today derek evans and our staff at