they will introduce participants to the wealth of programming at the ymca.

>> president serina: any comments or questions from the public? motion to approve? thank you. any further discussion? all in favor. any opposed? motion carries. item m. requesting authorization to modify the existing grant agreement with next village san francisco for the provision of the village model during the period of january 1, 2019 through june 30, 2019 additional amount of $50,000 plus 10%

contingency for the amount not $291,636. thank you again linda. >> commissioners i take your approval for the budget modification with next village san francisco. next was founded in 2019 and served northeast sector of the city. next stands for in th northeast exchange team. they have local restaurants. there are film showing. there are writing classes.

big part of village infrastructure is volunteer coordination of services. part of the fee for membership, you have the opportunity to call the village office, ask for a ride to the doctor and that volunteer services coordinated for you. the more members you have the more request come in and the more volunteers are needed. this is a big part of the village infrastructure maintaining this program. daas funded village program have a membership fee that encourages the active involvement of its members. this members become really involved in their part of owning the village and what goes on. $25,000 is o.t.o. funding to

support next village and its low income members. [please stand by]

basically a turn key training system for people in the community. there will be signage and a sill bus and anything that 30th street has developed along with training. there is two tool kits win geared toward staff and one geared towards tit participants. 30 the

social isolation coming together to sing. i'm sorry commissioner i'm sorry for the confusion.

it's there. any comments or questions from the

we know there is a great demand for this this particular target population that doesn't qualify for the normal form the of the interest significance traditional form of the systems because of income issues. it seems to me it's logical to give it a little more time so you can assess how successful it is and what may be done

differently to reach them but we know the population is there. any comments or questions from the public. hearing none may i have the motion to approve. >> so moved. >> seconded thank you. all in favor. aye. any opposed? thank you. i tell s requesting authorization to modify the existing grant agreement with university of california san francisco for the pro significancare --provision of tm evaluation of the only support program for an additional amount of $200,000. and plus a 10% contingency for a total amount not to exceed $440,000. in 2017 we contracted with ucsf to provide support at home and to provide continuous quality improvimprovement and data anals

and quality of life out comes and the efficacy and value of the home care voucher model. the final report will have the possibility of the extension of this model. it's not a rigorous project they are utilizing standardized research research models. last year the program activities

do not benefit from the program services. they are not required to participate with the evaluation. as such adding incentives and staff time for follow up for the surveys will create a comparison group so the outcomes could be prepared. that will led more confidence in the findings to the program

impact. there is an additional year two report. that report will be due in july. the final report the next year in june. it will include a cost benefit analysis, policy implications and future recommendations for whom some financial as assistance for home care cost would make a significant impact. this concludes my report. >> any comments or questions from the commission? any questions from the public? hearing none may i have a motion to approve. >> so moved. >> second. >> thank you. any further discussion? all in favor? any opposed. thank you. >> item 7. general public comment. hearing none, item 8, announcements. hearing none with great regret

may i have a motion to adjourn. >> so moved.

>> san francisco recreation and parks department offers classes for the whole family. rec and parks has a class for everyone. discover what is available now and get ready to get out and play.

henri matisse. frida kahlo. andy warhol. discover the next great artist. get out and play and get inspired with toddler classes. experience art where making a mess is part of the process. classes and the size the artistic process rather than the product. children have the freedom to explore materials at their own pace and in their own way. talks love art, especially when they died into the creative process -- dive into the creative process. at the end of the classes, they have cleaned and washup. of.com great way to get out and play.

for more information, visit sfrecpark.org. that out and play and get into the groove. rec and parks offers dance classes for seniors. first-time beginners or lifetime enthusiasts -- all are welcome. enjoy all types of music. latins also, country and western. it is a great way to exercise while having lots of fun. seniors learn basic moves and practice a variety of routines. improve your posture, balance, and flexibility. it is easy. get up on your feet and step to

the beat. senior dance class is from sf rec and park. a great way to get out and play.

>> good evening, welcome to the february 6th, 2019 meeting of the san francisco board of appeals. frank fung will be the presiding officer tonight. he is joined by rick swig, anne. brad russy will provide the board with any legal advice this evening. at the controls of the board legal assistant, gary and i'm julie rosenburg the board's executive director. we will be joined by representatives from the city departments that have cases before the board this evening. we expect scott sanchez, the acting deputy zoning administrator, joseph duffy representing the department of building inspection and chris buck, urban for esthe forester. the board meeting guidelines are as follows. the board requests you turn off or silence all phones and other electronic devices so they will not disturb the proceedings. carry on conversations in the hallway. the rules of presentation are as

follows. appellants, permanent holder and department respondents are given seven minutes to present their case and three minutes for rebuttle. people affiliated must include their comments within the period. members of the public not affiliated have up to three minutes to address the board and no rebuttle. please speak into the microphone. to assist the board in the accurate preparation of minutes you are asked but not required to submit a speaker card or business card. speaker cards are available on the left side of the podium. if you have questions, please speak to board staff during a break or after the meeting or call or visit the board office. we are located at 1650 mission street. it's broadcast life on sfgov and will be rebroadcast on channel 26. the video is available on our website and can be downloaded from sfgovtv.org.

we will affirm those who attend to testify. any member of the public may speak without taking an oath pursuant to their rights under the sunshine ordinance. if you intend to testify at any of tonight's proceedings, and wish to have the board give your testimony weight, stand if you are able, raise your right hand and say i do after you have been sworn in or affirmed. for those people who are going to be giving testimony, do you swear affirm the testimony you are about to give be the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth? thank you. we have one housekeeping item. item number 8 has been drawn. this is 18.161 thomas doughty subject property at 1 at 189 maa street. we'll move on to item number 1 which is general public comment. this is an opportunity for anyone who would like to speak on a matter within the board's jurisdiction but that is not on tonight's calender. is there anyone here for general

public comment? we'll move on to item number 2. this is the election of the officers. we are required to have annual elections of the officers at this time of year. i want to thank president fung and vice president swig for all of your help and service this past year. so, we will start with the offices of the president. are there any members of the board who would like to nominate a colleague or themselves for the office of the president? >> i'd like to nominate frank fung. >> any other nominations? is there any public comment on that motion? seeing none. on that motion -- i should check. president fung, would you be willing to accept this position? >> you don't want to do it anymore. >> president fung: i will, thank you. on the motion to re-elect president fung for another term, president fung. >> president fung: aye.

>> commissioner lazarus. >> aye. >> commissioner honda. >> aye. >> that passes. we will move on to vice president. would anyone like to nominate a colleague. >> i would like to nominate vice president swig. >> ok. vice president swig would you accept that? >> v.p. swig: sure, thank you, very much. >> is there any public comment on that motion to re-elect vice president swig? seeing none. president fung? >> aye. >> commissioner lazarus. >> aye. >> vice president swig. >> aye. >> congratulations. so we will now move on to item number 3. commissioner comments and questions. any commissioner comments and questions? >> i'd like to congratulate my president and vice president for their second year. also, wish everyone a happy chinese lunar new year. year of the pig. >> thank you. >> is there any public comment

on item number 3? seeing none, we'll move on item number 4. the adoption of the minutes. commissioners before you for discussion and possible adoption of the minutes are the january 30th, 2019 board meeting. >> any corrections or addictions? >> move to adopt as submitted. >> we have a motion from commissioner lazarus to adopt the january 30th, 2019 board meeting minutes. on that motion, president fung. >> aye. >> commissioner honda. >> aye. >> vice president swig. >> aye. >> so the minutes are adopted. we'll now move on to item number 5. this is appeal number 18.134 mark bruno versus apartment building inspection 15 noble valley and 472 union street. protesting the issuance on september 21st, 2018 to paul of an alteration permit. renovation of an existing bath and kitchen and unit 2 on the second floor and in the studio unit on the first floor to

comply with 201-84-0721. this is application 2081. note on december 5th, 2018, the board voted 4-0-1 president fung absent to continue this matter to february 6th, 2019 so that one, the board can receive a full set of complete plans from the permit holder and two, d.b. >> j. gonzalez: i can assist a permit holder with clearing up notice of violation and the parties can submit supplemental briefs. did you have a chance to review the material for this matter? >> president fung: i did. >> so, we will move forward and we will hear first from the department of building inspections and then the planning department if they wanted to add anything and the permit holder and the appellant. each party has three minutes each. >> good evening, commissioners.

joe duffy d.b.i. i just got a chance to go to the property today. i did a site visit. i met with the new building owner, there sketty his name was. i was interested in the number of units in the building. it was unclear with inconsistency over the years whether it was five, six, seven, four, 12? so, the property itself is one building. it's got two street front ages on union street and it also fronts on to noble valley at the back of three units and three units. the buildings are connected to they're not actually separate buildings. it's sort of got three units stacked on one, three units on the other building and on the ground floor on the union street site, there's an area and i think that's the area that on the building permit that they

got was referencing a studio unit on the first floor. that's not actually a legal studio unit. i did point that out to the owner. he was aware of that. you know, at this point, the work was started it was demolitioned on and they're in the middle of the remodel. without recommended any action, certainly on the description of the permit, the renovation of existing bath and kitchen in unit number two is ok. the end studio and first floor to comply with notice of violation is not ok. it might be that we deny this permit and they just start again. they're easier to get. they're the kind of permits with b.d. -- let's start all over againi.

>> when this permit would be denied, and a proper set of plans come in for whatever they chose to do within the legal units of that building, i don't think it's a problem getting that permit. it's pretty easy permit. they're opening the units a little bit. they're taking out a wall between the kitchen and dinning room with structural drawings and stuff like that. i didn't see the drawings. they weren't on site today. the studio unit would be something that would have to go through the planning department. it's a project at that point. >> a separate permit. >> on a separate permit, yeah. >> so is there any hardship created by canceling the permit? is there any hardship that would where you toccur by wiping the n tomorrow morning at 9:00 a.m. he could go down and file for a new permit given proper plans and

proper organization? >> yes, they actually did file a couple of permits which they haven't processed yet. we don't want them to process until after this appeal. it shouldn't have happened. they wanted to -- that's exactly what they want to do. i think the intention is to pull separate permits for each unit. which makes it simpler instead of calling it unit two. there's two unit 2s. 12, 3, 1, 2, 3. they do have some news with old expired permits that we're going to have to work through and they did promise me they would do that. they did try to cancel the permit with dbi so i don't think they have any problem with the denial of the permits because i think that's the part they wanted to go anyway. they wanted to cancel this permit and start fresh. >> is there any hardship by canceling the permit created to the project sponsor?

>> i didn't see one. apart from the fact the units will be vacant for longer. >> just to confirm, no revised drawings were shown to you. >> i didn't get any. >> i shoes not to have a revision and could have been accepted by this board. >> ok. >> mr. bruno, if you say something, you need to come to the front corner an counter. >> president fung: my question to mr. duffy was there any drawings had been shown to him and he answered no. >> mr. sanchez, last time you provided comments. not tonight. we will now move onto the permit

holder. permit holder's attorney. >> hi, i'm leo laraque here on behalf of the permit holder. on january 28th, 2019, the contractor did, at the suggestion of this board, file a request to cancel the permit associated with this appeal. i was advised by ms. rosenburg this afternoon via e-mail that when the appeal was filed, the process stops and the permit cannot be canceled. that's why we're here today. mr. morgan thomas, who is the representative of the owner of the property and the -- one of the employees of mr. biskety was at the meeting with mr. duffy.

a suggestion was made with regards to amending the existing permit to remove any reference to 472 union street and to amend the plans that were submitted pursuant to the original permit, which is now subject to this appeal by removing any reference to 472 and move forward with the permit application that was submitted many, many months ago. i understand mr. swig asked the question would there be any prejudice or hardship with regards to canceling the permit now and starting with a fresh slate. essentially submitting new plans and permits. let's get this process moving. the only indication i would make and i would, at the suggestion,

what we would suggest happen is we were prepared to amend the to 472 and to amend the existing plans that remove any reference to 472 union street and the plans to unit number 2 is essentially simple remodel or an alteration with regards to a reconstruction of the bathroom and a kitchen in that unit.

>> each party was given three minutes each so you won't have an opportunity, sir. mr. bruno, please approach. and you have three minutes as well. >> thank you, mr. fung, for speaking so i could hear you. you have a beautiful, deep voice but it's hard to hear as i get

older. i am here because i appealed an application which is a violation of many rights of the people who live in this building. you didn't have the advantage, commissioner fung, of being at the hearing on december 5th. in fact, mr. buscatti purchased this property at a director's hearing. mr. duffy wasn't there. three people from dbi were. he purchased it upon the finding of the director's hearing, meaning our own inspectors that we pay for, who are objective analysis of this property to say no more work can be done on this property. until many conditions are met. so to suggest that this is just a minor issue at unit 2 or at 472 or 15 is not the case. he purchased it at a great reduction in the then asking price of the property. it's all at the board of appeal, rather the assessment and recorders office. the property was being asked 2.3 million and it went for 1.8 million the very next day

to. he owns many properties in this city and to suggest that he was unaware that this baron-looking room that no one has lived in, this so-called studio, could be in fact part of an application for a refurbishing is dishonest. there's no way it could be made into anything unless you went through the proper channels to get an a.d.u. there's many dishonest things here. to go back why we're here today, i suck as it seems mr. duffy is suggesting as well, not to worry about whether or not the appellant might suffer in some way. he has made his own bed and must now lie in it. he has approached the city and suggested that this room that has never been used by anybody, since 1911, when the building was built, could somehow be now refurbished by him, illegally, to have a seventh unit in the building. that was done not without his knowledge. there is an egregious violation here. the studio, again, commissioner.

>> president fung: didn't havfuh he was so refurbish, there is no studio. there's no square footage unit. the size of the so-called studio so how many mistakes could he make? there's no location a the ground floor that he describes in his application. for all these reasons i think the board should deny the application on these grounds alone. as we all know, the board of appeals has three options. one of them is not to just, as was suggested by the other party, the attorney for the other party, just let it go or alter or alternate the current application. it's not one of the options. the options are to deny my appeal or to deny the application or to send it back with conditions. i ask you again that it be denied for all the reasons i presented. thank you for your time. >> for the record, president fung did have an opportunity to review the plans and all the

materials submitted for the earlier hearing. >> thank you. >> is there any public comment on this item? seeing none. commissioners, this matter is submitted. >> president fung: i have a question further for mr. duffy. >> just to confirm again, the configuration shown on the plan of the space that they want to renovate, is that an unoccupied space that would represent a seventh unit. >> correct, that's right. >> so it has to be an a.d.u. >> it is. >> president fung: which has to be different applications. >> it's a completely different process. that permit was -- that's why it's not -- the remodel and unit number two for a kitchen and bathroom, that would be simple

enough to get. there are issues with the plans as well. i didn't get a chance to say that as well. the site plan, the flor plan of the building, they are better to start again in this case. i don't think i said, mr. bruno said i said i was unaware it was a studio and why think i said that. if i said that i didn't mean to say that. i don't know why they show it as an exiting studio but it's not a studio yet. they can go through that process and mr. bruno can object or support it as he wishes as well. >> are you done? >> this board has another option which is a special conditions permit where we can't accept a revision and apply that to a permit. >> correct, that's right.

if we have to hold the appeal, is it because the permit was issued. the existing studio. the studio did not exist. >> i'm going in that direction. thank you. >> these people can do a lot better than this. that's what they need to do. the discussion i have with them today is that's the path they need to go. this is an older building. they want to remodel the units and bring them and modernize them and that's a good idea. we have a process for doing that. it's simple actually when you do it right, and you have respect for the people living in the building and people in the neighborhood. you get through your proper inspections and that's the indication i got from them today and it's the road and i will get on that road and other people in dbi ask as well. it's an older building. if they want to do it right, we'rlw