>> good afternoon. welcome to the a special meeting of the government audit & oversight for today wednesday, october 265, 2016, i'm the brunt chair aaron peskin joined by board president london breed our clerk clerk

erica major madam clerk, any announcements? >> . >> yes. documents to be included should be submitted to the clerk. items acted upon today will appear on the please read the brunt first item. >> may we make a motion. >> i'd like to make a motion to excuse vice chair supervisor norman yee can we take that without objection? that will be the order. and madam clerk the first item on a resolution urging the employee richard to hold a public hearing and issue a report >> thank you. the sponsor of that report has asked that we - we mr. unexcuse supervisor yee he showed up and supervisor yee we called item fundi have been

informed this to the to postponed without objection. >> supervisor yee is excused any any public comment on item one without objection we'll continue that item through the chair. >> madam clerk the brunt final item. >> the oversight processes for the fine arts museum of san francisco and it's board of trustees thank you, ms. major colleagues as you recall on september 1st, we held a hearing looking at the governor structure and oversight of the city funding processes with regards to our cherished fine arts museum and timed to continue that our new director of fine arts museum couldn't be

with us i wanted the brunt opportunity for us to meet him in public as a stewards that institution forwarded and follow-up on a few items the original impetus for the brunt hearing came around resolutions having to do with things in the newspaper but an opportunity for us as a board of supervisors to reengage with the fine arts museum which is an asset of the brunt people of san francisco and has a very interesting governance structure whereas, the gentleman is familiar although apparently seen other structures in piss past we have a city does in the fine arts museums of san francisco a nonprofit side in co-family the 5013 nonprofit orientation all

over the place a third organization a foundation for the brunt museum and some of those city puts in approximately $18 million at the last meeting believe that is incorrect 19.2 in the current fiscal year about 25 percent we believe approximately of the brunt annual operating budget of the two museums known as the legion of honor and the young museum so i wanted the an opportunity to talk about some of the things we might be able to improve over time particular as transparency there are certain things that are transparent to the public and to the decision makers like ourselves and heretofore are not taint with that, i want to give the brunt gentleman an opportunity to speak to us and for us to get to know him and to

follow-up on our last hearing we raised a number of issues if there are no questions i'm going to turn it over to mr. hotline and welcome we're delighted that you've joined us you have a long history in stewardship museums around the brunt global with that, please come on up. >> well, thank you very much supervisor peskin and supervisor president breed and supervisor yee i'm here able to lay out some thoughts but i guess those structures and outcomes about the organization of the fine arts museums of san francisco and respond probably to some of the questions that have been raised at the first meeting and those are kind of at a briefly to prepare for to hearing pr

i've prepared a presentation that covers this and tends i'll show pictures it is nice to show you some things to kind of - >> yeah. >> oh, i can see that thanks. >> okay. >> all right. okay so. >> good. >> just quickly as a general remark i as it supervisor peskin mentioned alluded to identify been running museums no frankford in the last few years ago i've got experienced 40 in running different kinds of institutions one was a private institution private foundation no germany and this was a

limited liability company but as one that run as a nonprofit institution i have a fair amount of experience with those institutions in fact, quickly address kind of a general thoughtful the brunt fine arts museums i think what you'll see in the next couple of years more emphasis on the identities and the brunt beyond especially at the legion of honor nothing - really bringing in more to the attention of a broader audience and a bigger role internationally as well being really one of the defining institutions for the brunt city and i think i can see this as a someone coming from germany or

as a european focus on san francisco and some of it it obviously building on the whole development of the tech industry and other sectors i think the brunt culture history of san francisco is extremely important to understand what this city it is something that brings me here and be able to participate in this environment i know you don't want to hear about great plans arrest advisements about the brunt museums but hear a little bit more about the brunt details and data about this institution so i kind of threw - sorry - so the second slide shows you one the challenges of this institution and basically makes a difference i'll say if you

accountability compatible institutions or participating institutions in the u.s. you compare the brunt finances of san francisco so new york or the museum of fine arts in boston or if you look at philadelphia or cleveland you have a steady small endowment you see this as a red triangle basically about 3 percent of our total operating budget is covered by endowment that basic means the brunt other areas of income to balance the budget on the wooden revenue part in the blue triangle which is our income and other aspects like membership you, of course, go have the very important support participation from the

brunt city which covers 27 percent of our total costs that is being invested in the city in security and maintenance of the building but then a fairly large portion with the green sector of contributions that is the major nominations support for the exhibit shuns and the general organization and to one of the tasks i'll say of every director especially right now for me is to be able to enlarge that particular sector that means we need to portray an institution that is organization alley sound and transparent and really taken care of of funds in essence in a prudent way that is part of story of that institution and on the other hand, i want to make sure when we move forward that

i'll see with the public eye and the preservation about the brunt museum the art and education that is bringing about so i think that is a core element of that if you look at what the cultural assets it depends on how you define that but the brunt core part would define that the context thee we're called a nonprofit organization is the brunt permanent collection i'll talk about that in a minute that has to do with with the brunt city and the core part of it the exhibitions we bring about but, of course, the two buildings that we maintain that are landmarks building and profit savings accounts and the brunt whole program in the area of education, scholarship and outreach

so talking about the entire layout of the the spaces the legion of honor has in total 4 hundred and 10 thousand square feet if i look at how much square footage is dloftd to excellenttion space noted about only one quarter of our total square footage is for exhibition the brunt rest is actually storage space where we must maintain and keep our collection of art bring in artwork conserve them and treat them conservatism space in that context the total number of objects in our collection and i mean that total number we have a total nuke but sometimes difference on how you calculate i don't know if you have a whole set of prints or 10 but in total we

know we have numbered one and 26 thousand plus objects those kind of if you spread them out to the departments as you can see beyond thirty thousand objects in the legion about one and - almost like 90 thousand that basically has to do with with the brunt large prints and drawings collection as the brunt legion of honor but this is a fairly large and complex and diverse collection other thing i need to make you aware of a different to what you have a painting gallery or even if you have a museum of contemporary art we're keepers of costumes and at that point tries, objects, of different kinds, furniture and painting and drawing, etc. to keep and maintain those objects we need

skills and also needs different storage amenity and temperatures to keep them photography at different temperatures it is a way to maintaining the culture archive of the achievement of humankind we display our special exhibitions and definitely only one thousand person of the collection is on display but a collection it all about being the brunt keeper even if cultural artifacts or of artwork that used for different exhibitions one the bay area we have those objects and wanted to

do something and lends them to them but we do about 20 major art exhibitions a year at the legion of honor a lot of time are based on a core on the collection and moving forward in our program is to concept lists we really want to show the brunt strongholds of the institution and boys and girls club build on that ambitious but internationally exhibition program right now at the legion of honor very a celebrated show on 7 century french painting and recorded on that we hope you'll have the possibility to visit it in the next couple of months one of the contemporary american artists of his generation and

then benny the photographer for - which will get his large-sca large-scale retrospective of his art i know you don't have time but see how far ahead we're planning our exhibition program is quickly stitched together no, but requires planning and budgeting three to four years ahead so i'm just giving you a quick synopsis of the exhibitions of the legion of honor and early - shawn and other sculpts turns and work

from our collection of art 1906 and then f d young will open in april of next year a picture on the brunt sum of life on the history of the city during that particular time then smog really different happening at the same time in other galleries about the brunt marilyn projects from new zealand and from many mexican considerations is here then a show on precision our development of the 1920s ones last name the different and challenging evolution showing african objects again another

show in africa and another show of missouonet - the building i challenge for upkeep it is important for you to know because the buildings have owned by the brunt city so and this city money and locations help us to maintain those buildings to improve them to the way to preserve the collection within those institutions so we have done a different kind of arrest chief and work to give you as you may know any of those houses

about all sorts of - the brunt necessities to maintain the brunt buildings and someone's o sometimes the brunt projects we have may is here we have a real issue right now because our whole system broken down and it is something that is challenging we don't have temperature control that is a risk to very valuable work we need the brunt city's report to replace the brunt exchange of honor - >> but then, of course, the brunt notion of the museum is not solely a reapostrophe for artwork but all about outreach

and education it is about coming together it is a community not sole a place to visit but a place that radiates and takes on tasks in schools it is about cultural and education of a different kind for example, the internet especially for old school - we'll be completely prepared to - concerts and performances of different kinds that kind of speak to different audience but then i think one of the question is supervisor peskin has raised is how do we do as a administrators and make sure that city assets are properly kept in this institution

now i have to say this is one part i really feel confident the my name is performing at perfect amongst it's peers and one of the proof of that is what we call the the american association of - basically like a self-imposed audit to the american association of museum comes from time to time and basically checks how we keep and what our procedure that is the brunt same way that is industry standard we have evaluations continually amongst ourselves among the brunt museums to be on par with what is happening and there's a whole series of other

elements that reilly make sure that the assets a properly managed and give you a quick overview the brunt departments taking care of different areas a quick synopsis and the staffing for the brunt staff they're not solely there to produce exhibitions but really keepers of the collection keepers in this case of the city assets and here images of our conservatism department that certainly one in - the brunt best in the country and well-equipped and show you some examples of kind of how we can keep and treat the artworks i have to say in my quick overview of the one and 26 objects in the

collection almost everything the brunt city owns is a couple of arts within the foundation it is - really one of the smallest seethsd so here you'll see the brunt work in the conservatism labs and that's what i've spoke about beforehand different storage areas have different kind of efforts of maintaining this work so - >> and here you see the brunt complexity of the documenting of artwork and basically a question of storage from puck you transport it to a special area then photograph it and dig it's it and bring it back we've done that for 80 percent of our total collection that is fairly good

the collection management again one and 26 thousand objects we get z hundred to one thousand loans has to do with with the brunt restaurant and exhibition program by one .5 million visitors a year that requires a loan process and sending loans out to other major institutions about one hundred loans go out between one and one and 50 the ambassadors the strong collection here collections to have the fine art museums a strong symbol in paris from us at the major shows i can only encourage the brunt city of san francisco and it's representatives to make use of

that and i will be pleased and i've done it in frankford i know that sometimes the negotiations between the brunt city and other city about becoming sibling cities we can move that platform we're representing the brunt cultural power within the this institution and within the city in general so the overview of the collection management and the acquisitions of bringing negative impact new work to the majority of the nations is financial but the parts - though the money that is funded to the museum is only being used for other artworks coming in not other operational needs storage and lending and borrowing i've talked about the brunt transport

and this is the transfer of the objects over the challenge with any institution you'll find insurance kind of through the brunt city right now covers a kind of damages i don't know what the proper english word but $200 million so don't. >> don't we have a lord's of london policy on top of that. >> insurance that covers busy our institutions bus the brunt asian art museum and one more - institution. >> but kind of i think. >> the in memoriam. >> yes. exactly but that is something that we might have to evaluate from time to time total expenses just again get an

idea about it you kind of allocate how much staff time and you spend about $3.3 million a year just for collection care. >> so what's really important for us on the other hand, prove that the brunt museum that very well respected and monitored by the brunt government agencies is near received 3 indemnity programs for the brunt last major check and balancetion through the u.s. government indemnity this is basically, if i look at the brunt total insurance value it is over $2 billion a major figure and major help for kind of operating budget. >> now acquisitions that is

the commodity how much into the brunt collection and finally into the city holding and what is - that follows the brunt american association of museum guidelines it functions as a commodity so it is recommends gifts and that is prepared, of course, with the brunt different total departments within the institution. >> and director is that a committee of the board of the fine arts museums of san francisco or the corporation. >> it is a foundation board so and it is comprised of the scholars and other members of the transition of the comedy. >> i believe it was spoken to on the first hearing. >> quicken acquisitions we've done our 200 and 70 in the

fiscal year but almost one thousand nine hundred workers depended upon in the at the same time an idea of the donations. >> i will say one of the challenges as a lot of institutions is we have, of course, the brunt collections management software and that is something that is developed over the course of years and given the brunt whole development of software ♪ area in general and the magnitude of our digital files the objects in particular this is a strong need for us to improve that particular software i mean, that's working and sound but that will require a significant amount of investment to kind of come to the next level of collection management software

so i think that is kind of what was a broad overview of the assets and supervisor peskin kind of mentioned that very complex set of our structure of sorry - different entities i shouldn't repeat this this is part of last time i'm happy to do it once again but don't want to waste our time >> director lounge how long have you been at the position. >> i started in early june. >> a few months in terms of 3 governing bodies the public one a function of the at the charter in article 5 and the foundation and then the nonprofit board co-family how do

you find them working together. >> and i guess technically which one you worked for 2 of them or how does that work. >> i worked for all of them director of the museums and in and a city employee as well i think after having the brunt chance for the brunt last 4 months to be involved with the two board meetings i can see kind of a very good understanding how the brunt different boards can work and work together but i have to say, of course, it is a complex structure more complex structure than a foundation this is similar to the asian art museum but i think for the brunt different board

members it is very clear we - what the brunt responsibilities are and what the responsibility is for the respected boards. >> so you have basically 3 classes of employees people like yourself that is paid by the city and people paid solely by the city and totally by family. >> i have a slide so here's the staff breakdown so you have the co-family staff that is the brunt staff that and total co-fam staff is 16 and this is

the regular one and 86 unionize and on calls that is store clerks and people that used for in high peak season and then city staff that is staff working in security and other capacities. >> supervisor yee. >> thanks for trying to explain that my question when you were hired who hired. >> i mean who do you report to. >> is that like a bunch of people that cast a vote that's how they make a decision to hire

you. >> in the process that i assume has taken place and saw happening the boards amongst themselves search for a committee for the brunt right director when i got hired i basically, had a hearing and had this discussions with the brunt search committee that was comprised of board members and i was then hired by the brunt board being represented at a point by the board of trustees. >> and is that the fine arts museum board or the brunt co-fam board. >> both. >> kind of in that sense it is both because you work as a kind of a city employee with - but someone that is kind of worked with the co-fam it's an

institution as an employer but the foundation. >> and there are how many overlapping employees are paid both by co-fam and fine arts museum of san francisco. >> well, if you see that there are - not an overlap the city employees among the brunt 200 and 5 city employees the frontline staff some management staff the director of museum, the brunt director of human resources and security building and maintenance the brunt chief preparer and two curators are the employees but gather the stipend of the program. >> i get it. >> the one thing maybe a representative from the brunt controller's office we'll clear up i've been informed that we

have far less full-time equivalent from the brunt city and county my numbers are one and 25 that's because our on calls are fractional. >> that's true what we call positions uh-huh. >> they're not necessarily built. >> with the brunt city they should be filled and maybe now a vacancy we'll bidding right now trying to reevaluate. >> so the brunt total - >> you're saying a total of 5 hundred and 20 total employees. >> right uh-huh. >> got it. >> so you'll fall under other 6 employees. >> correct. >> and relative to how those

boards are selected and how session within the brunt board membership how does that work the boards are kind of you have a - that's been kind of again something that kind of has before reviewed and kind of i'll say kind of improve there is a - but has a nominating committee taking charge of suggesting new board members that are asking the brunt board members to stay on the board and be therapists kind of a structure of a duration of candidates that can be renewed and serve on the board. >> there are no term limits. >> that's the term limit a year but you can get ask gunning

again to kind of serve on the brunt board for another term you mean that is something that right now is being worked and what is the brunt best proper subsequence that applies to all people on the brunt board. >> as an industry standard relative to governance is there a best practice that is an appropriate term. >> i have to confess on this front i assume i'm not the brunt absolute specialists on the boards governance i think that is something you have certain institutions i know that - i guess you if you look at the brunt modern art in new york and on - the board member for the brunt last decades and has been very beneficial for the

institution i guess every board kind of comes to a particular conclusion but there is a proper board structure for every specific institution how you look at that yeah, and and relative to transparency and the ability to see for the brunt public to see the decision makers to see what the individuals out of the three hundred and 16 make is that pubically available i'm talking about salaries is that only available for those on the city does. >> the city does, of course, is yeah - no, that's for the brunt side that is not public informati information. >> thank you. >> supervisor yee. >> i'm still can't get a handle on you can have different entities influencing an

organization and certainly you can have not advisories and friends to bring in money that's why i asked the brunt question for the hiring and firing who's - which body makes the brunt final decision if there needs to be a final dedication or is the brunt body a body that is not on the diagram that is made up find different individuals from 3 bodies. >> right. >> so i'm not getting a sense of belonging what it is that is governi governing. >> right i think i'm not i can properly answer that question in that way but there is a key

responsibility of the directors assumes and the brunt board so i don't want to be portrayed that way but the brunt - and firing in that sense for the staff is being done by the brunt director and ceo of the institution but what the board as a whole maybe hires the brundirector. >> when you say board what do you mean what board are you talking about. >> there is something else not on the diagram. >> who made up the board. >> the board is busy - different responsibility for the board and kind of how you say a fine arts museum the trust

department where the trustees their main responsibility to be the keeper of the assets of the museum so the artwork and the buildings that is reported on. >> that is from the charter and can't exceed 62 people i believe as portfolio members of the board and self-perpetually unlike virtually every other commission we have they elect. >> right and repopulate their governing body they appointed to their own board self-perpetually. >> and the on the foundation and the gilding - that's a

board that can have up to 17 elected trustees up to 9 and then so - this is busy whether the endowment funds are kept and the co-front it the organization part of institution, of course, i'm here in my capacity as director and ceo of the institution not the neither the chairman the president of the board. >> right. right. >> it is interesting in this governor overview slide is that interesting enough it is the non-exit at the center of this diagram the logical way i think the works this is evolved over years after the last hearing he was talking about what happened in 1924 what happened and there are older city attorneys people

that actually remember when proposition 13 was passed and have a theory that co-fam come into existence to augment financial giving to the institution as public monies he dried-up but nevertheless, it is interesting not the fine arts museum of san francisco you think the waking way it would work the co-fam and institution lead into the public entity you're correctly a city employee and the way - because and this is just a true fact of life because you're always out they're having to an, an annual basis raise a large amount of operating budget and the city is

25 percent of that solution it puts us in angle interesting position which is in any other department of city government the public can see all sorts of things go to the commission meetings and see what the business is and see the minutes and agendas and, figure out you how much a city attorney is paid or a city official like a supervisor it paid because of that diagram it is only an o pack and public side and i don't know if it makes our job any easy as you have to do the instant cycle of fundraisers but the more transparent it is the better off and more beloved that will be for whatever that is worth. >> i probably i don't know if

i follow that analogy i think having i mean this diagram shows yes. the operation center of the institution that is where all the programming exhibitions, etc. are done and the majority of expenses being coming through and are being paid i don't think though it is - this is a structure that kind of only special to the institution i don't know if you have the same analogies for the similar structure. >> no, i think what is good. >> what i'm trying. >> no, i'm trying to say not something that is done for this particular institution but, yeah - a i'm a new director it is something that is done to operate assumed in the best way possibly and makes that flexible

and dynamic and gives them the ability to operate in an environment. >> how does that work no frankfurt. >> frankford the city is paid a stipend by the other institution throughout the city is one the board is a city official so there was a separation but the institution i used to run in frankford one of the separate institutions. >> that was associated with one another. >> it was me running 3 of them with separate contracts. >> colleagues, any questions anything you want to add ms.

moore. >> anybody here from supervisor breed. >> thank you. and welcome to san francisco you started a couple of months ago i wanted to make a few comments that is complicated as supervisor peskin knows i used to run the african-american agricultural complex he started as a executive director but paid under the san francisco arts commission they had challenges and intersection for the arts i was the fiscal year sponsor so it was complicated hard to explain my job was a oversee a budget to raise money but technically a city employee and improving expenses through a nonprofit agency because - a

lot of i mean public oversight public money involved a lot of process a lot of challenges, but fortunately, we were able to be creative and establishing and setting up a new nonprofit and during the period e developing a nonprofit to oversee the facility very complicated, very frustrating process but ultimately that was 20 to protect the institution in the best interests of the institution i think that oftentimes in the aortas because of the public and private partnership that needs to exist in order to develop the financing necessary to manage those institutions they can be complicated and this particular structure is probably one of the most complicated structures that

exists as it relates to the relationships with the city i think that what i ultimately want to say is there is never a one-size-fits-all some things work better for one institution and may not for another i think this is a good structure and it works for the institution great if there are improvements that what about made to assure transparency to city funds that would be helpful but ultimately i know that this is an incredible museum and has incredible support and has been a great community partner growing up in san francisco when i was a kid you know there were field trips to the defendant young one of the most boring

trips as a kid chase interesting after the rebuild especially is that when the de young opened when i was the director of african-american complex that was a lot of outreach from de young to small institutions to invite us in to actually pay our artists to be part of the grand opposite and the performances that continued that fire hydrants with the de young bringing in the community and making that more interesting and making like art especially like things that are exciting for a young kid to have a better relationship with the next generation of artists has been remarkable initiative and fun

and actually, my favorite institutions in san francisco and we over the years have done so many great things with the dei did not know with the artists have be paid - to be able to borrow fixtures with our smaller institutions was something i do truly appreciate that under mr. buchanan i don't think is a great director and the folks at the museum renee and others have been wonderful to the community and the past and i truly appreciate that and hope under our leadership that

relationship will continue and with that, i'll say if there is any recommendations or discussion improving the governance structure that can be better proposed we are definitely open to that this is very complicated fortunately, i kind of understand it i'm familiar with that but for the average person sometimes that definitely can get just a little bit confusing and note make sense but ultimately i think that it is important to continue the work of the museum and also to make sure that the public is completely aware of how public dollars you know are being spent and there is full transparency in any process as it relates to that and people understand the other parts as it relates to the

city dollars specifically a desire to do this i think the corporations i know that nonprofit are required to do anyway that that would be helpful but this is my $0.02 separately but more importantly i want to thank you for being here and i want to thank the museum and it's many members of the board of trustees for their continued advocacy and continued fundraising efforts to make sure that is one of the most treasured and best my name is producing some of the best exhibits i've ever seen you know i mean just the east san lauren and all the creative cool exhibits but really remarkable so i hope that under our leadership will continue in that direction thank you. >> thank you supervisor president london breed for those remarks and then before we hear from a

representative of the controller's office do you know is there any written agreements between if i mfam and co-fam as researching how the city charter development in 1996 some changes to sections 5 point one 05 of the charter that says the board may enter into agreements with a not for profit or other legal to maintain the funds for museum support there's a word missing there but. >> i think right the understanding of that but it is part of whole governance process

and all the processes we have right now in kind of have been the work we kind of fortified and put this into more deeper the different responsibilities of board and the cross collaboration between the board so what you see we've hired a non-positive hired as part of the progress started already before i came here is that the management consultants look at this different governance structure and improved some of the - not so much the mechanics but more or less to make that more transparent. >> that whole process they each as part of this whole infrastructure taking reviewed a

2012 performance government audit & oversight and city support actually for all the museums this was done simultaneously for the asian and fine arts museums and the war merrily and the academy of conceives have you seen that i mean. >> no. >> so i have a number of finding one findings at least back then this then there was a conclusion the fine arts didn't have sufficient processes maybe gotten better in a number of years and a series of recommendations has to do with are governors around term limits as far as i'm concerned, were never adopted and responses from the institution at a time some

of them as a thank you but no, thank you some say good idea we'll do it but interesting to have a followup. >> i have to view it i haven't i've been really busy he looked at the current status on the institution i understand it completely understand the past and it is very relevant document but haven't reviewed it i have to assume the recommendations have been followed kind of there has been a process if 2000 to foreperson follow that if anything is not there i'll certainly make is one the duties to look at that. >> i would not assume anything thank you director ohio line i'm delighted you're on board and concur with the comments of supervisor president london breed and look

forward to helping you do what you need to do to secure the fund and continue to make that institution it is and with that, i believe someone from the controller's office if you come up and tell us about the status of our ongoing audit that is kind of what got us here in the in the first place. >> thank you. >> thank you. >> hi, i'm kate the audit manager with the controller's office on the audit efforts the fine art museum and the status is basically, we're planning to issue tomorrow so at the next meeting we'll have to present our results any preliminary words you want to share. >> unfortunately, we can't until we get the report. >> the suspense is killing us. >> anyone wish to comment that wants to testify sienna motion to continue this through the

chair and continue to visit but and we'll be at the helpful as we can we'll continue this item through the chair and we're adjourned

>> the wednesday, october 265, 2016, of the san francisco board of appeals. the presiding officer is commissioner honda and we are joined by commissioner fong and commissioning commissioner wilson will be absent to my left is brad the deputy city attorney and prides the board with any legal advice and at the controls gary and i'm cynthia goldstein the board's executive director. and joined by sacramento the city zoning administrator and representing the planning commission and planning department 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're going to testify please standard you're about to give will be the whole truth and nothing but the truth? >> i do. >> okay. thank you commissioner president honda this is is a housekeeping item four on tonight calendar regarding a building permit on twin peaks board of that case has been withdrawn and not heard

this evening. >> regarding item number one that is general public comment this is the opportunity for anyone who wants to address the board on a matter within the jurisdiction that is an item not on tonight calendar any general public comment tonight okay. seeing none move to item 2 commissioners questions or comments and still crying being at last night's warriors game other than that i'm okay. >> item 3 the consideration of the minutes of the board meeting of the october 19, 2016, additions, deletions, or changes can i have a motion? >> to accept the minutes. >> so moved. >> the motion from commissioner lazarus any public comment on the minutes. >> seeing none, then on that motion from commissioner lazarus commissioner fung commissioner president honda

commissioner swig 0 e thank you that item passes with a vote of 4 to zero commissioner wilson absent we'll take our item 5 appeal carmen versus the zoning administrator on richardson avenue protest protesting the issuance of a rear yard variance constrict a 3 floor and roof deck for the rear yard of a single-family dwelling and we'll start with the appellant. >> good evening and welcome. >> i guess you didn't release i ordered a private hearing this evening. >> yes. this is so rare actually. >> i feel like i'm at the end of the >> welcome reuben, junius & rose i need to make a disclosure. i wish to disclose i've hired reuben, julius & rose on a on a

project of my own the handling the board will not have an effect on my decision. this evening. >> thank you, commissioners ryan patterson on behalf of the appellant an appeal to construct a third floor on top of a 2 story in the marina my client owns the adjacent property directly to the north at the 2547 to 49 cellist nut street and owns the rental property on chestnut street renderings and we're here because the variance that was granted will have a terrible impact on the properties destroying an existing bedroom as you may know the board of appeals has wide discretion in hearing the deliberations with the power and

the board thinks that vaurnsz are not to be granted whether when there is a harding park on the property that is hardship variance law and other things not met including that is a qualifying hardship that makes the variance necessary not the run of mill normal circumstance with a small lot and someone needs the lots in order to develop it, it is a small lot but created by others predecessor in fact, the owners predecessor used to own both properties the appellants property to the north. >> can i have the overhead? >> this is the the subject property and the appellants home here this is lot 12 and this is lot 12 a and the history is in 1940

after a road was cut to the golden gate bridge these lots were divided but not until after the the subject property u subject structure was built one owned the lot and built the existing appellants property long before in 1939, 1940 built the structure after that was dub after the same owner that happened to design this property that owner decided to split the walk intentionally creating the sub standard conditions for both properties this tina separation between the two now they were allowed to do this because the building department imposed a asking 40 permit to construct this property there's a restriction and on the overhead you see it note on the

permit to construct mr. boskovich will talk about that requiring the separation is between the properties so the applicant comes here to destroy that decoration was the condition of constructing their house this is the old adage ask for a cookie instead of a crone i'm happy to address that i'll mention the variance are holder counsel pointed out one thing that super seated didn't talk about a legal citation i can give us other citations pointed out one citations is inplausible to this situation i'll ask her to say a word or two thank you. >> someone reminded me, you

can't fight city hall yet here he am asking for an appeal thank you for your time my name is carmen i've lived on 2547 chestnut street lived here my whole life and own rental unit on cellist nut the building next door to my home in 40 years i've never formally opposed anything any of my neighbors wanted to do by that project will effect any home and the two homes of high neighbors the addition of a third floor to a roof deck walls in my two properties filling in the small setback brings richard southern closure to my building only a few feet

between the building and and setback notch that separates that richardson from my home and the neighbors building those buildings are tight like puzzles pieces we're able to live side to side because 68 richardson a 2 story building by upholding your deoperating us of privacy and the quiet enjoyment of all our bedrooms on the back all of this so 68 richardson a building that defies city code can have a hot tube and fire pit so i ask you to take a look at this project and overturn this variance decision thank you. >> good afternoon, commissioners i'll be very quick the 1939 code when this main

building was built here basically said do you want you want to do when they got a permit to build the permit application referenced the housing act required a 4 feet separation and 8 feet separation to two building it is in the brief verbatim to the housing act from that window to the bedroom to the average of that preschools no such if they in fill that puzzle we're effecting this permit when they permitting this building it was on the same lot and if you read the description on the application it calls out separation from one building and the other building both the buildings are tried

together to this notch you remove the notch our opening up that window and have to revisit that issue. >> thank you okay. >> we can hear from the variance holder. >> welcome. >> good evening commissioner president honda and commissioners david silver had an on behalf of the carter family can i have the overhead? sfgov just to orient everyone to the site this is richardson right here

this is congest nhestnut over h pink dot it the carter's property quite a way from the property this is a 5 thousand square feet property with two houses lot line to local 104 line 100 percent coverage we're over here 6 hundred and 18 square feet 5 thousand, 6 hundred and 18 you'll notice that every house loan richardson is 3 stories including our adjacent you'll notice all the houses along chestnut 3 stories

now their chief complainant as i understood their testimony is about a window this is the window this window is on the second story of the rear of the sdelz property you'll notice up still yesterday it had bars across it, it is also inoperable on the lot line and had the shades drawn 100 percent of the time it is my opinion that they're raising this to try to over turn the variance there is no, no impact the window is not used for light and air it gets plenty of light from the south and west and continue to get it same light

after the addition is built i'll mention those workers who were hired by mrs. diesel to tear down the bars yesterday didn't give any, no, sir, to the caterers this is their stairway no notice. >> the lot depth 80 is 25 feet the average lot depth is one hundred an irregular parcel severely undersized their crammed and like to stay in the city and have a family only the two of them with such a small

footprint of 6 hundred feet with another story to provide an extra bedroom or two have their kids and stay where they are hoping we'll chief that. >> now the zoning administrator as we know has great lad it is the duty to exercise his discretion to deverbiage from the rear yard requirements he deems it appropriate he's experienced his board discretion appropriately in the face of reasons i've explained the 3 stories will be consistent with every other house on the block of richardson and also with chestnut no impact on the window as i showed you and the deck on the on top of

roof is intended to provide a little bit of open space for the carters they have no rear yard the only ones on the block with no rear yard so hopefully with that deck they can benefit from a little bit of outdoor space and i'll remark that the architect for the carters made a change to the project as requested by the zoning administrator and we will ask that you uphold the variance thank you. >> thank you good afternoon scott sanchez planning department. the the subject property on richardson within an rh3 district that allows up to 3 unit and the lot as known is

substandard 25 wide by - it is generous a large section that is sliced out of it when they created richardson to create assess to the golden gate bridge this relates to a proposal to expand the existing building as stated the single-family dwelling has within bedroom one vertical addition it provides a roof deck and given the size of lot very little open space and little habitable space that provides more ample space for families living on the the subject property as well as the open space on the roof it relate to a building permit application that was submitted at the end of 2014 it does trigger a variance the variance application was filled the hearing to be held earlier on february 24th the

original scheme was the stairs while stills interior to projection more to the adjacent pertaining to the north we received comments from the neighbor to the north with concerns of the impact on their property as is applicant look at a scene to look at it is within the footprint and provided the project to keep it within the footprint of the building on the ground level to the the subject property and in terms of history of the lot yes i mean this was created it was legally created it was created at some point between 1940 and 46 it appears on 1946 block that is important because 1946 minimum lot requirement so after that time it could be only created with a variance but it was lawfully

created has the legal single-family dwelling on the the subject property in terms of the hardship there is a hardship with regards to the lot and the appellant august's it is something while not of the applicant making of the predecessors making section 305 whether or not it is a hardship created by them this is not the case and it following the logic of the appellant none will find a hardship because someone responsible for the creation of the lot at some point in time and always a predecessor that created the situation that is there today with the appellants argument you'll not be able to define that or reject that notation if you find the 55 unit have been met they made the changes responded to the concerns we had the level of this this is 1re78d above at the

level it is developed a substantial separation within the buildings the main issue is the interpretation of the notch and how it may impact that window it is not going closer to the footprint at the hearing the concerns that were raised by the neighbor in regards the impacts on the windows that are quite a bit further away towards the chestnut frontage of the property but still have the project sponsor we issued the decision letter by january 27th and it is appealed there is as i mentioned the permit application the section 317 was noticed and that is the states not heard by the placing not that i'm aware of it is scheduled at this point

those are the main points that i wanted to raise from for the boards consideration. >> and i'll be happy to answer any questions you may have. >> thank you. >> so do i go ahead. >> no, go ahead. >> mr. sanchez you stated that the changes you required made them keeping it within the existing footprint but filling in the notch is expanding beyond the footprint. >> the notch is only the second story the ground level thank you. >> i understand they're intending to fill from the notch above the first building. >> that's correct. >> on the rear yard is 45 percent. >> 45 for that and 15 feet or

25 percent whither is greater. >> the impact on the window is not significant. >> because it is maintaining a separation the initial proposal there say, i think about a 3 and a half 3 foot 3 separation within the property line and the subject this wall that is maintained the previous proposal so you get to build within that area in terms of the stairs that connected the 2 story to the proposed 3 story had them keep it within the footprint and not expand beyond the footprint of the existing building. >> that didn't change from the current time. >> right for the project a we've heard. >> commissioner swig. >> so i'll concerned about the owner of hardship and hardship goes both ways

i'm a homeowner and have bought and sold a couple of homes in any life one of the things when i buy a home you do due diligence and do cc&rs and add ones to previous permits and something like that. >> buy our house fort richardson but looking at to the chestnut street neighbors they bought their homes probably could have don't know wasn't there but if it was me would have looked at and saw that house was closed and feeling comfortable i was protected by a permit when the house was built so i go ahead and buy the house so is there not a hardship created when someone who has

owned a house for a period of time whether or not one or four judge's doesn't matter bought the house because a permit was in place to say that will not move further from this what is the argument and the issue of hardship with regards to appreciation owner and current owner again if i buy the house on richardson i look at the cc&rs i look at previous permits i see on the previous permit it says i know there as restriction here so if i go ahead and decide to do this i'm creating the hardship for myself it seems is that right where am i going wrong. >> we can blame this whoever built this in 1940. >> it was wrong in the in the

first place. >> on chestnut. >> i live 5 blocks away. >> on chestnut is not compliant and the window of the property line is non-compliant they bought that knowing that was adjacent to the building in regards to 68 richardson a special refresh my recollection no setting back must be a setback no planning restriction not a setback requirement of any planning approval that was part of building permit approval for the building permit itself this - so that's not the things that of enforced by any planning regulations it is subject to change this will have to be reviewed by the department of building inspection and if it causes an impact that needs to be addressed at that stage of

the process it didn't appear to be in violation of any building permit requirements as now i believe those requirements exist they've superseded by current requirements not that i'm aware of that will prevent the subject proposal into moving forward. >> i'm bother by something you just said because it undermines it seems to nine things that go on here on occasion we have found the project sponsor tagged on something a tag on something is in perpetuity you have it i've seen it in our brief imperpetuity ones you build it forgot about coming back and

asking again so it was what you just said you kind of dismissed a ruling any ruling we make is contact dismissed because you choose to. >> with regards to something as a permit. >> from the laws change in this case, the requirements no longer exists can't enforce a requirement that no longer exists and that will enforce the perpetuity we've been presented with i mean part of it is to the property who guess buying if no bead restrictions talking about what the requirements are and the building permit allows them to do this i mean it is a sargent issue in the variance. >> due to the change in the

law and the codes that the 3 feet or that 3 foot setback that was required in 1946 was dismissed for or. >> least. >> an 8 foot spraegs is no longer required that's my understanding. >> are you finished. >> yeah. >> that was along the lines so mr. boskovich showed a documents on the overhead indicating that there was some type of special restrictions in the past lots of restrictions you knew current laws radio over ridden is that the case. >> not a notice of special requirements on the property noted as a condition of approval by the building department a

health code requirements for the property we do this approved per planning code xyz if it planning section changes in the future the property will be subject to those future requirements down the line just because it is noted on the application didn't mean that. >> set in stone. >> exactly. >> okay. next question is the appellant mentioned did window is that a lot line 2021. >> it is within closely proximity to the lot line it looks like a foot or two of the property line. >> is that a conforming or non-conforming window. >> with the you'll have to ask the department of building inspection about those matters. >> okay. thank you. >> commissioners do you want to ask the question of the

building inspection we don't call them up usually. >> we have rebuttal. >> we'll take public comment anyone wish to comment under public comment? >> hi, i'm a dell lawrence i represented any client for a tenant in 2541 and 43 chestnut street i wanted to know i didn't get is the lawyer for the people with the variance or with the people from the planning department. >> advocating any attorney i didn't get it the attendance i'm advocating for one is a young family with an 8-year-old child that lived in the apartment for the past 5 years and a young couple that is

rented the apartment they're in rent-controlled apartments having they have no money to move it will block pair light and fresh air when i represented the apartment he highlighted how light and airy those two flats were for them to raise their families in and had a lovely garden ms. diesel didn't have any backyard as well the same configuration but this iowa's one as a lovely the yard i want to read a letter. >> amends are you employed by the parapet at this time are you the project manager and. >> i maintained the lots for the tenants the tenants

submitted a letter and asked me to read it. >> who are you paid for that in renting those flats. >> i was paid by ms. diesel for renting the flats and. >> i think she shouldn't be allowed to give testimony open her own behalf but allowed to read the letter. >> she wrote this letter to the city and county and board of appeals it, it is dated october 24, 2016, we've lived on chestnut street for 3 years and have truly enjoyed our apartments our master bedroom it has a nice amount of light and air the only serious of light is from the

backyard as a low building allows the sun to shine in this the richardson area is allowed inform construct this we'll lose the ventilation into our bedroom our source of light will essentially be a light shaft not be able to see any sky and the ability for air to flow through the window and described the value of our apartment as good neighbors we've not done anything to invite this into our lives our bedroom looks into the bedroom of richardson avenue and shuts on the windows our neighbors leave their kitchen lines and the light penetrates if it is allowed to have their way there will be more untuition into our daughters bedroom the

roof deck will greatly diminish the enjoyment and we'll receive more noise from the deck we can often hear the occupant from the house screaming foul language and we i can only imagine what will happen. >> your time is up. >> who's bedroom backs up to the backyard we're copyrighted that will evening fringe on the quiet and we driver's license are legal restrictions and respectfully ask that the board of appeals deny the requested variance i have copies with. >> thank you so you can see it is their words and not mine. >> okay. thank you any public comment on this item. >> step forward. >> good evening jonathan wade

thank you for letting me speak i live on chestnut on the corner of richardson and chestnut i have two children a 12-year-old daughter any daughters bedroom faces 68 richardson at the back of the house my daughter is going through a rough part of her life a teenager and the last thing she needs is the additional noise and privacy encroached on with a hot tub and we can anticipate what will happen to that deck i'm trying to protect my daughter as any father will do this is my daughter so i humbly respectfully ask you

turn down the variance to protect any daughter thank you for your time. >> thank you any other public comment? >> my name is james the homeowner on 2555 chestnut and been there since 2001 i want to emphasize whatever the determination he am hopeful we can get along ultimately and i do want to emphasize i'm fair late in the process on this hearing about it in the last month and during that time i'm concerned of the impact of this project on my backyard one of the aspects of with my wife in 2001 we had a nice backyard a small amount of sunlight providing a nice environment

that is the enjoyment of the property i am concerned about the additional story as well as the roof deck on the light in my backyard and determined through a shadow studies that was provided by the architect it impacts significantly the light in the backyard in the morning and potentially impacts the windows in my house those are the concerns besides there is concerns about loss of privacy as well so i'm concerned about impact on quality of life and the property value of my own property on 2555 chestnut street thank you. >> thank you. >> any other public comment. >> hi i live on chestnut and

richard son is friendly and neighboring i think that since this happened the things have changed and very concerned about again, the things that my husband brought up about privacy and noise it is simple a noisy street we're obviously on route to the golden gate bridge and even with the earplugs our daughter is woke even up i 3wu78gd into the street i had friendly relationships with the owners and you know said hey wanted to let you know those are our concerns and not received well, i understand that everybody is upset effecting all of us but we're all trying to

protect your best interests and given the comment that basically we'll get steam rolled over and last week to think we can all be heard and both sides as commissioner swig mentioned impacts yeah take into consideration there were other words said i wouldn't want to say i hope we as a neighborhood can get along after this as well. >> would you would you care to state your name. >> thank you. >> any other public comment? seeing no other public comment rebuttal starting with the appellant >> thank you, commissioners ryan patterson for the appellant very quickly and then i'm going to turn it over to to the architect to speak to the technical impacts first there was a quotation from the planning code about hardship created by the owner that was a

personal quotation the full quotation correlate hardship not created or attributable to the owners property unquote that is a lot broader and speaks to basic tenants of the zoning law for the previous owners the property the hardship is passed from owner to owner with the understanding that the hardship is either a future of the land and if it is self-imposed it is knocked down second there is an exception and reliance by the buyers of this property and the properties that the built in safety measures and setback will be preserved this is a lot line window if they're built up in 3 feet the planning code requires the best case scenario put in very expensive

$50,000 sprinkle system a major impact on this property and lastly there is an mention we're removing the stairs so alleviate the impacts the zoning administrator letter reduces the impact but not limits is this impact is still there good evening mike of architecture can i have the overhead? please. we do know, of course, a reduction in sunlight and ambiance try to deal with that so we did a sunshine study and found a reduction in the south facing bedrooms in both of the buildings going to be over 1/3rd

increase in the mass creating a boxed in feeling for the tight constraints that exist that think that is important to think about the 1940 building permit allowed there in a stand point there is a difference ♪ situation and san francisco building code number 9 talks about the property line windows 6 feet is the number that comes up in the building code and there are issues of get rid of the building code when the configuration change these are natural air with the market >> go ahead and finish that thought your time is up. >> to potentially cut the windows off and make a significant impact on the just a

minute properties thus, this question about the 1940s building code and that co-existence a peaceful albeit it an older creation but today a new code that could trigger eliminating these windows the building department will have to define that is it is too calculated under the circumstances. >> i have a question for mr. patterson. >> yes, sir. >> you made the statement it something modesty trigger the installation of a $50,000 sprinkle you're talking about the clients property. >> it is a mandatory bedroom property line window if it had to be sealed up we'll preserve that bedroom requires you're familiar with the requirements

the only potential option we see perhaps can be poling to very expensive sprinkler system talking about a lot of money if it is even an option may not be and but it was barred so not is an egress window. >> egress is not the only requirement. >> of course. >> of course. >> and ms. zeller removed those bars not a safe condition didn't mean the window is legally extinguished in any way. >> okay. >> i'd like to ask the timing of the removal of bars over the last two days and what promoted that. >> that was last week and as we are knowledgeable about those things looked at the conditions and we felt not a safety

sleeping in that room. >> how long where those bars on the window. >> probably 20 years. >> thank you. >> those bars are changed. >> mr. patterson thank you. >> thank you. >> mr. silverman rebuttal time. >> thank you, commissioners can i have the overhead? again. >> very quickly i wanted to respond just to the new points that were raised i'm not going to go over the things that were discussed mr. wade lives on the corner the equivalent of 5 or 6 house separation between the carters house and here i didn't

find the comments about the hot tub per successful you as you can see the tree is obtain secured a big tree in the backyard no additional shading there i didn't find that persuasive finally on the owner of the window again, this is the window in question where the man is trying to you remove the bars it is i understand this is approximately the lot line it is barred - constantly shaded and not operable this is

approximately here off the screen where the bars remain they only took the bars off this one i find that curious and also, this is the walls of the caterer house and the notch that was referred to say further up here up the page so, so not going to be my building closure to the window this is above that man's head thank you. >> i got a question for you counselor. >> yes. >> how long have your clients been at the property. >> (inaudible). >> okay. >> thank you thank you. >> this is a technical question. >> sort of like a ships ladder up to the roof but how do you

assess the roof. >> how do the access the roof now. >> no, no based on. >> under the new plan. >> yeah. >> i'll ask 9 architect to answer. >> good afternoon ladies and gentlemen, i'm michael a designer other 6 architecture we're the firm that took over the project after the variance hearing a question how to access the roof it does have a ships ladder that will have sliding basically like a sliding glass door that is flat it slides over. >> the drawing shows looks like a rail along there. >> there is a parapet that will come up. >> there is built in seeking

yes. >> okay. >> i have a couple of notes about the shading. >> no, no my question was answered thank you. >> okay. >> rebuttal from mr. sanchez. >> thank you scott sanchez planning department. a couple of points in regards to the privacy that were related there are minimum windows on the proposed addition actually on the proposed level there are no windows that face north of the properties the windows on the lower level from closest so the bathrooms on the north wall so privacy issue from the constructionists the roof deck roof deck could be constructed on top of the building today without need for a variance not considered a significant expansion that will trigger a

variance the means of access triggers a permit but they can be added to the code and the amenities a fire put a gas fire pit not a smoke issue with a gas fire pit they show a hot tub area and then in regards to the required variance finding yes. the appellant has correctly restated in the planning code section 305 that it does look to the whether or not the hardship was contributed to the applicant or the owner of property it was not created or attributable to the building constructed well been before the property owner bought the property in 2012, the situation was a created lawfully at the planning code has changed

over the years the buildings are now non-complying and in terms of of the impacts on the neighbors i stated i had concerns with the project as it was previously proposed and building that has a negative impact that was significant on the neighbors the code dpa call for a variance to mitigate all the impacts from development but whether or not a detrimental impact and given how they've provided the project my understanding it is 3 feet away from the property line not the triggering the closing of the property line window non-conforming and on the appellants property that is my understanding and perhaps joe duffy dbi can add further information to that i'm available to answer any questions. >> i'd like to carry one of our thoughts through that if those hardships sort of

westbound pass on or hereditary and you never make in any changes and what was the point of variance hearing. >> good question that's why i have trouble with the logic by the appellant they're not attributable to the owner of the property because the language has attributable that somehow. >> you choose to buy. >> they choose to buy it not creating the hardship the hrpts existed when they bought the knowledge but i--i don't know how one will find that hardship if that was the case we're looking back to as they're creating a path and lawfully as we can tell. >> thank you. >> mr. sanchez are all the blocks in the arena non-conforming like this one.

>> no, it's more. >> no building conforms to current the entire block. >> it is difficult and more challenging on this block because of the angle of richard so that yeah. a fair number of non-compliant buildings along richardson. >> because of angle. >> yeah. and post some building were moved as part of the widening of lombard and the cut over of richardson to access the bridge the buildings were moved but not non-conforming not because of building code. >> are you done. >> you look at the beginning of lombard it supermarkets r interseconds lombard they were planning on going down the blafld with the understanding a

legal non-conforming structure your according to a planning code claiming it is not a hardship of the prophet or the property owner but given the build and the angle of the street and it's close prompt i didn't to four or five neighbors you don't consider that a hardship on the other neighbors. >> that's how to make the changes that reduces the impacts i mean certainly those buildings are they stepped to they're building walls and tried to address that and reduce the impacts by having them segment within the 15 footprint. >> i mean, i understand the other buildings are non-conforming they're not trying to add stories. >> not adding two stories one and a roof deck. >> only two stories. >> okay. >> and then - i was under the

understanding the property line was 4 feet and combrours were required. >> my understanding that maybe i'll let the inspector joe duffy answer that. >> commissioners would you like inspector duffy to come up. >> we want to make that worth his while we're paying that department. >> good evening, commissioners joe duffy i was on my way home. >> (laughter). >> so that's the question you know considering that a lot of properties in san francisco what we call attached and have properties unattached but when you put lot line windows the planning codes says within 3 feet you don't have to have them like fire protected and their expensive; is that correct. >> for that occupancy it will

be 3 feet for the single-family dwellings so the property via the property is single-family dwelling so it is two units 3 feet you can have to do with 3 feet 3 foot 3 to the property line and because when the window is existing in the 1940s i don't think we'll tell them. >> are tree grandfathered in. >> pretty much normally what happens if their are windows closer sometimes the planning code will make them notch to protect the light and the reminded for that but i can't see any fire rating if it is 10 feet 3 away not an issue the ab 9. >> it is on the property line. >> i'm looking at 8 to one

from the property line. >> wall. >> so the new construction is 3 foot 3 the appellants property near the property line and that's what i said and on a that one is grandfathered in. >> those people suddenly come out and make a complaint there is a windows on the property line we'll not go back there it was there in the 1940s what they're talking about an administrative building code in the 1940s if you want to put if property line windows on the property line you can do that they have to be 4 windows with the surprisingly head you're giving up the right to the building and a document it is notarized and can't suddenly say the windows are there. >> that's like in the code now

but it wouldn't have been there in the 1940s i can't say something it was a variance case i didn't research as much if i do there is a building code and maybe that probable we'll be dealing with that then and the project has not been approved by the dbi and hadn't reached us yet so okay. >> thank you for explaining that inspector. >> and you might be in agreement whatever happened whether with that project under construction they'll never interfere with the windows or file a window on the windows on the neighbors property line and your saying not grandfathered in. >> so does that mean you said they'll not complain why what we

complain. >> they could complain anyway. >> you said it window was grandfathered in so why will they complain. >> it was part of the original construction we uniform usually don't go there. >> thank you. >> your presence are requested. >> the other point that we have to be concerned is changing the character of the neighborhood and also goes into hardship again, i know the neighborhood really well, because i lived there for now 20 years and the, of a roof deck and on the roof deck building of a fire pit and on the building of a hot

tub i don't know i don't know of house in the marina residence that has that condition i mean in my own house i have a deck that extends off a second floor over any living room the house was built in 1926 but i don't know of this would be consistent with the concern of changes with the character the neighborhood i don't know of a house in the marina with that type of condition whether a roof deck hot tub and fire pit and all that stuff and that also goes to hardship the neighbors because - >> do you have a question. >> what about that. >> i think that is a good

point. one we hear at that board and often in particular in this district about people having a lot of roof deck we've seen a lot of them on the south side of cal hallow and lombard and gotten to the point the district supervisor asked about development guidelines for a roof deck and questions about notification for roof decks, etc. i understand that point and the permit holder attorney passed me a photo of with an the adjoining building has a hot tub not a full floor roof deck like this would be it is more but there is habitual area and hot tibia deck off of that area i think that is at some point i mean whether you you know the board feels that is there are issues with the character of the deck that should be reduced in

terms of the occupancy or capacity i'll understand that in terms of neighborhood character in the size of the building the adjacent property is on 3 stories the overall height is less but a 3 story building. >> don't worry about the height swuchs as the intrusion. >> this is before the board i mean, you're hearing 24 the variance decision and be able to justify that but i understand there are a lot shown on the roof deck just honestly we've seen people - to add those features you don't need the permit maybe no notification so we are asking people that put minimum things open their roof deck and add more features after they go through notification but no trigger of a notice in this

case they were very open been the amenities they wanted and mrirld for that what they're seeking and the matter is totally before the board. >> the roof deck is intended to be open space otherwise not on the property. >> otherwise the nullification on the property is the 3 feet passageway and this would be actually usable open space for the residents you know at the hearing that was compelling argument about the desire to have something that is more usable for a family and something they can grow into and certainly found those arguments compelling in meeting other properties in similar sdriblgs that are able to have. >> for which not other options on that property; right? >> last question mr. sanchez and so there's a rear yard variance and nothing required

for a front yard setback. >> no, no requirements in this case. >> thank you thank you. >> commissioners, the matter is submitted. >> now the - i think mr. sanchez was referring to me when he was referring to discussions on residential design. >> everyone was referring to you when discussions on roof decks commissioner. >> no, i think i'll refer to bring up a couple of things because i don't consider them as important as the issue of hardship as an example you know the shadow studies done but the

appellant yes probably correct they're in the summertime i doubt there is much different impacts the rest of the year your question here is have they demonstrated hardship. >> it is clear that the it is a property right enjoyed by other people around the area i mean every building there is non-conforming so i don't want to get into a question of whether one persons hardship is different than another persons hardship because we are looking at this whether that has criteria of the finding were satisfied when i first look

at it was some double park in my mind that all 5 were satisfied especially where they filled in the notch i supported i think the idea that the zoning administrator brought forth that anything they do to the property will require a variance because there's no doubt about that i'll support the fact they maybe needing more space contextually the 3 stories are fine i made that agreement why they should have a transparent screening at the roof that perhaps that should be a obtaining absurd. >> i'm trying to come to a

decision a variance that allowed them to make the notch was totally justified. >> can you explain that. >> i believe the variance in general in terms of allowing them to build to a certain extent was justified. >> normally i would have said when we deal with other areas in the area non-conforming structures like telegraph hill you know i've been against some of these variances which allow an expansion beyond existing envelope and in this case i'm probably leon towards. >> with restrictions or allowing it? >> allowing it i think i will ask that the. >> obscure glossary i'll

support that. >> i'm not 100 percent convinced the feeling's we're meat a convincing stance from the department and the hardship of the property is the hardship of the property at the same time, we don't want people fleeing from san francisco and 6 hundred and 18 i believe square feet is really not much you can do to the property equip go up and take out that notch you don't get much and since this is probably not the last time we'll hear this case i'll be willing to join my two fellow commissioners. >> batter up. >> i consider the hardship

continued no hardship to you know the i believe that the project sponsor bought the house should have recognized that there was this condition. >> yep. >> and therefore suffers no hardship therefore your 5 fksdz are not met so i think the hardship is to the other neighbors so - i'd like have to be convinced more. >> make a motion with a condition that requires 4 votes. >> i wanted to ask a question about the condition you're considering which is to place a certain type of glass in the railing for the roof deck; is

that right. >> make the parapet. >> parapet. >> didn't have to be obtain i'm not sure. >> sorry to interrupt - >> if they don't put it in there. >> yeah. >> then, yes. >> at this time are you saying basically materials are not under the purview of the variance. >> no, i guess i'm curious if this element of the design is within the context of this variance. >> i think that expands into. >> what if it requires 4 votes. >> let me finish it expands into areas that are beneficial of the variance.

>> excuse me - benefits of the variance. >> i think that is equally part of it. >> i agree portions of railing are within the rear yard as well as the fact that in order to get access to the roof deck you need to encroach into the rear yard i'll consider that is as acceptable condition as part of surveillance letter. >> thank you. >> i'll make a motion i'll move to grant the appeal and condition the variance on changing the glass rail around those roofs to an opaque parapet and that i find with that then the 5 findings of a variance

met. >> let me clarify seeking a solid parapet or some 0 page thing that provides privacy. >> it is their choose. >> okay. >> sorry of the same height as currently proposed. >> yes. >> okay. so the motion from the vptsdz is to grant the appeal with condition the variance think changing the glass rail around the roof to an obtain page parapet and by making that motion you'll find the 5 fltsdz has been met. >> correct. >> okay. on that motion commissioner lazarus commissioner president honda commissioner swig. >> okay. that that motion

carries with a vote of 4 to zero and commissioner president honda. >> there's no further business. >> tonight

>> good morning. welcome to city hall. you know on october 8 during fleet week there was an event that happened on our waterfront. a boat capsized. some 30 people ended up falling into the water including children and adults and it could have been-it set the stage for a huge tragedy during a time at which so many people are our city were coming together to celebrate fleet week. when that event happened fortunately, people who have been trained in people who were

good san franciscans or just people who are goodwill came together and responded. there were obviously called the were made immediately. were voters who saw what happened. some screamed at the top of their lungs that they needed help. some of the nearby voters saw what happened and saw some people without life-saving jackets werewere apparatus is through what they had into the water. others who saw kids in the water jumped in rather than watched to save them. the fire department showed up immediately assessed what has happened the san francisco police department particularly, the marine unit which i've had the pleasure of working with on the waterfront jumped in and paramedics came to the site. a

couple of individuals were rescued from the water but could not breathe and so cpr was given immediately on the shores and paramedics immediately rushed those that perhaps were not indicating weight consciousness into our zuckerberg san francisco general hospital trauma center. there, life was saved when you look at this potential huge tragedy you wonder how as a city we kind of were lucky but it's not luck. i will tell you it's not luck. it is people who every day are sensing that something could happen and they were ready and this is what we have as a city often times talked about being a resilient city, a city that's ready and

prepared that were so many people, not just the professionals, not just police and fire and public health and paramedics were actually trained to do this, but ordinary citizens who may have been there also had a sense. they were going to save lives and do with they could do. i, today, wanted to say thank you to each and every one that we could identify that is not working. i know fire chief feels the same way i do. our police chief feels the same way we do. our health director does as well as our department of emergency management. we are holier today to take a moment. i know in everybody's busy lives and i know you all want to get right back to work doing more of this because this is what you came to san francisco to do but let us take a moment to say thank you to recognize that in these moments of

extreme need i am so gratified to be part of a city that says we are going to put aside whatever it is, whatever challenge we have, died in to that operation and save lives. save kids. save families. i watched as this unfolded and i was aghast at how many people were in the water with film footage is that are repeated over and over again. but i think the film footage i want to see and continue to see is the operations of people who respond in a very very good way. no one lost their lives that day. that is hugely important when you have an event of this magnitude. lives were saved, not only in the water, on the shore, on the way to the hospital, but in the hospital as well. doctors, nurses, paramedics, firefighters, police officers,

volunteers, and other boaters. today i just want to say on behalf of the city and county of san francisco it is my honor to join all of you in personally thank you for really you are sure it was him. i know it's kind of maybe two dramatic to use that word but we do have a city of heroes, a city were prepared to be heroes because they want that label but because your objective is to save people's lives and to make sure that we all get to enjoy much as we week, but to enjoy this city and the opportunities it provides. i, for one, and certainly everybody in my staff and all the people that serve it officially want to say, thank you and if i the opportunity i would like to at least take-make for personal

pins as my staff and i and the chief and others helped me pin every single one of you.. i hope that you received this with the requisite appreciation that i do as the mayor of this great city, but also that i've been around now for 30 years working in the workforce. so i am a brother to all of you. because i know i've worked alongside people who are really really dedicated to this city. but i say personally, thank you to each and every one of you for the work that you do the demonstration you showed the patients, and the honor of preserving life in our city and i know that as these kids grow up and of course come i think they will remember it for the rest of their lives because they get to but they'll be very thankful for the kinds of things that we do for each other. with that, if i may have in him can prepare this and i

can get help from our chief as well? [inaudible] by the way these are hearts of san francisco. >>[ceremonial recognition]

>>if you did not hear that i

feel too mentioned was a boat out there that mr. schulz -stoltz owned called happy days and i just think that's probably best example of what occurred that date with everybody working as they did. so each of them will get

pinned today with a certificate of honor and again on behalf of the city, thank you very much achieves, thank you for helping me do this and honoring the men and women and also the volunteers in her hospital as well. thank you. he was thank you mayor day. very proud to be a good high-tech oh your comments. every one of you stepped up that day and mayer lee thank you this did not event occurring 11 days ago for your office which is a very big book very busy office to recognize all these members such a rapid period of time speaks volumes and is free much appreciated by myself and achieve as well as all our members. so i will begin asking each one my members to come on up to receive the mayor certificate of honor garden with capt. john would go.

>> >>[cermonial honoring] >> firefighter joe silva. >> >>[cermonial honoring] >> i'm going to have a commander that they chief odo assist with that painting of the members. firefighter william boyle. >> >>[cermonial honoring]

>> firefighter john tupa. >> >>[cermonial honoring] >> paramedic andrew kristofferson. >> >>[cermonial honoring] >> paramedic michelle seidel >> >>[cermonial honoring]

>> paramedic rebecca law >> >>[cermonial honoring] >> firefighter mike horta. >> >>[cermonial honoring] >> firefighter matt adams. matt is not here. okay. and capt. clyde christoph. >> >>[cermonial honoring]

>> from the event are dormant thank you to mayor lee and thank you to the members behind me and all the members the work so diligently that they would all the partners. >>[applause] >> just real fast, this is a first responder worst nightmare to look and see this many potential victims but all the folks stating the honey stepped up to the plate went immediately into action. that's what we trained for things just like this. our marine units have the obligation of obviously handing handling things in the water is why you see them out all the time to deal with issues just like this and i promised them i would also give a huge shout out to the kos guard who actually got 20 people out to safety. they wanted to make sure that they ignored the us coast guard for their efforts and for what they've done. this is a huge collaboration between as the mayor said earlier private citizens in the folks that put

on a uniform to do this thing as a matter of course. again i want to really liberate that these are heroes and these were a relic actions performed that day because this is definitely worst-case scenario. with that of the first presentation that will be to officer nick betancourt cured i'm sorry nick is not here. sgt. keith matthews. >> >>[cermonial honoring] >> next up, officer mike bushnell. >> >>[cermonial honoring]

>> ofc. braden todaro. >> >>[cermonial honoring] >> officer matt mckay.

>> >>[cermonial honoring] >> is kaplan and i know it's all about the teamwork and i was reminded by chief bodo south san francisco fire department happen to be in the area because it was clear week so we were blessed in so many ways for good samaritans and our partners in neighboring jurisdictions in south b van fire was responsible for rescuing eight of those 30 in the water that day. so we would

like to give them a shout out and acknowledgments as well. thank you very much >> the last thing i'll say this is a coincidence of the future and the future is collaboration between everybody. law enforcement, fire, ems everyone and citizens. we've all come together in this city has been one out of unity and it was demonstrated appropriately in this incident with the civilian helping fire, police, pulpy groundwater and save their lives. as the mayor said before there's a lot people that are low back on this 20-30 years on the road and understand as are looking back because of the relic effort with the folks sitting behind me and again was round of applause for all them. thank you. >> >>[applause] >> this concludes our program. thank you so much for coming. >> >> >>

>>[gavel] >> good morning everybody and welcome to the san francisco board of supervisors budget and finance committee meeting for wednesday, october 26, 2016. my name is mark farrell all be chairing this committee. i'm joined by supervisor katie tang and supervisor norman yee. i want to thank the clerk of the committee and sfgov tv for covering the meeting today. do we have any announcements? >> please silence all cell phones. items acted upon today will appear on the november 2 board of supervisors agenda unless otherwise stated >> thank you. mdm. clerk all item 1 is >> item 1,