the closure negatively impacts accessibility for individuals with disabilities to visit the young museum and much of the east part of the park. the closure significantly decreases the number of a.d.a. and free parking spaces within walking distance. this also limits access for underserved populations in the community who may be burdened by the cost of paid parking, over which there is no control. i also questioned why when public transportation is being reduced, is there a push from sfmta to prioritize the specific agenda of the bike coalition and walk s.f. that is the end of that first message.

the second one is from muriel pathal. there have been a proposal for the 2021 of 2022 year. the administration has informed me to plan for a 40% cut to the non-credit classes for fall 2021. that equals 6.5 part-time instructors who have special skills serving students with disabilities. they teach cognitive retraining for people living with the effects of stroke and acquired

brain injury. adaptive computer skills, accessible arts and theater, healthy food choices, wellness and movement, and job search skills were people with disabilities. persons with disabilities and their families rely on the special classes that dsbs provides and will be severely impacted by the proposed cuts. dsbs helps people get access to education and to have compliance with the federal regulations. we provide disability counseling, testing accommodations, and accessible classes that are especially

designed to help students with disabilities. at the february 25, 2021, meeting, board president williams questioned the cuts to dsbf, but there was no action to protect the classes. i am concerned that the administration does not understand how dsbs is funded and how a cut impacts the funding allocations. a decrease in funding could in turn impact city college's ability to provide other services. this is different from other departments in that it gets its own special funding from the state. this is separate from the student funding formula.

this is a very lengthy letter and with your permission, i will summarize the rest of it. >> okay. >> and, debbie, i think it's important. i just had to look it up that we explain what this is it is city college disabled students program and services. it looks like these are the programs designed to address people with disability. i didn't know what the acronym stood for. >> right. she provides detailed information in her letter about how the funding works to provide these classes to students with disabilities and the legal axle that is mandated by the state to provide these services and since

they're mandated, there may be a shortfall, but the district may have to make up the difference. so the decision to make up these cuts is potentially having damaging effects on the way that funding is provided. she has met with board members. she had attended a hearing on the board of supervisors to talk about these cuts.

there will be a meeting to address funding for these needs. and it's anticipated that there will be funding from higher education emergency relief funds. so there will be money coming very soon, and yet the budget cuts will have very significant impacts, negative impacts, if they're made now. she is asking for the [indiscernible] in ensuring that faculty are not cut and the classes are able to continue. that ends my summary for the rest of the letter. >> very good. are there any general public

comments at this time? okay. are there any council member comments or announcements at this time? >> we have members of the public on public comment. >> okay. go ahead. >> caller ending in 726, you've been allowed to unmute. >> my name is richard rossman and i want to talk about j.f.k. drive. i also served on the committee that nicole was on and i just found out this afternoon that the first hearing about our report is going to be on may 11 at the san francisco county

transportation authority. they meet at 10:00 and their meetings are on the same channel here. and also this group was originally -- actually was supervisor fur's idea and when she decided not to seek re-election, supervisor chan took over. we came up with some good studies. we didn't decide whether j.f.k. drive should be opened or not. what kind of accommodations should there be there. my main concern is rec and park and m.t.a. follow through on our recommendations. so i recommend listening to the next county transportation

authority meeting through at 10:00. and i haven't heard your council closing of the upper great highway and i don't know how many in the disability community used to use a roadway but want to have access there. there are hills to walk up to get to the roadway unless you enter from slow or lincoln boulevard. it's something to think about, maybe when you have rec and park and m.t.a. come and talk about j.f.k. drive they can talk about the upper great highway. that is owned by rec and park, but m.t.a. sort of manages the traffic there. thank you for letting me speak

to that. >> thank you, caller. are there any other comments at this time or council members' announcements at this time? no. i just want to say thank you to all the staff and council members of san francisco gov tv and people who participated in this meeting. i want to adjourn. are there any opposed to that? okay. i'm going to call it adjourned.

>> thank you, alex. >> thank you very much. >> thank you. >> thank you, alex. >> good meeting, everyone. >> good meeting, everyone. >> bye, guys. >> have a great weekend. [♪♪♪] >> my background is in engineering. i am a civil engineer by

training. my career has really been around government service. when the opportunity came up to serve the city of san francisco, that was just an opportunity i really needed to explore. [♪♪♪] [♪♪♪] i think it was in junior high and really started to do well in math but i faced some really interesting challenges. many young ladies were not in math and i was the only one in some of these classes. it was tough, it was difficult to succeed when a teacher didn't have confidence in you, but i was determined and i realized that engineering really is what i was interested in. as i moved into college and took

engineering, preengineering classes, once again i hit some of those same stereotypes that women are not in this field. that just challenged me more. because i was enjoying it, i was determined to be successful. now i took that drive that i have and a couple it with public service. often we are the unsung heroes of technology in the city whether it is delivering network services internally, or for our broadband services to low income housing. >> free wi-fi for all of the residents here so that folks have access to do job searches, housing searches, or anything else that anyone else could do in our great city. >> we are putting the plant in the ground to make all of the city services available to our residents. it is difficult work, but it is also very exciting and rewarding our team is exceptional.

they are very talented engineers and analysts who work to deliver the data and the services and the technology every day. >> i love working with linda because she is fun. you can tell her anything under the sun and she will listen and give you solutions or advice. she is very generous and thoughtful and remembers all the special days that you are celebrating. >> i have seen recent employee safety and cyber security. it is always a top priority. i am always feeling proud working with her. >> what is interesting about my work and my family is my experience is not unique, but it is different. i am a single parent. so having a career that is demanding and also having a child to raise has been a challenge. i think for parents that are

working and trying to balance a career that takes a lot of time, we may have some interruptions. if there is an emergency or that sort of thing then you have to be able to still take care of your family and then also do your service to your job. that is probably my take away and a lot of lessons learned. a lot of parents have the concern of how to do the balance i like to think i did a good job for me, watching my son go through school and now enter the job market, and he is in the medical field and starting his career, he was always an intern. one of the things that we try to do here and one of my takeaways from raising him is how important internships are. and here in the department of technology, we pride ourselves on our interns. we have 20 to 25 each year. they do a terrific job contributing to our outside plant five or work or our network engineering or our

finance team. this last time they took to programming our reception robot, pepper, and they added videos to it and all of these sort of things. it was fun to see their creativity and their innovation come out. >> amazing. >> intriguing. >> the way i unwind is with my photography and taking pictures around the city. when i drive around california, i enjoy taking a lot of landscapes. the weather here changes very often, so you get a beautiful sunset or you get a big bunch of clouds. especially along the waterfront. it is spectacular. i just took some photos of big server and had a wonderful time, not only with the water photos, but also the rocks and the

bushes and the landscapes. they are phenomenal. [♪♪♪] my advice to young ladies and women who would like to move into stem fields is to really look at why you are there. if you are -- if you are a problem solver, if you like to analyse information, if you like to discover new things, if you like to come up with alternatives and invent new practice, it is such a fabulous opportunity. whether it is computer science or engineering or biology or medicine, oh, my goodness, there are so many opportunities. if you have that kind of mindset i have enjoyed working in san francisco so much because of the diversity. the diversity of the people, of this city, of the values, of the talent that is here in the city. it is stimulating and motivating

and inspiring and i cannot imagine working anywhere else but in san f [♪♪♪] [♪♪♪] >> so i grew up in cambridge, massachusetts and i was very fortunate to meet my future wife, now my wife while we were both attending graduate school at m.i.t., studying urban planning. so this is her hometown. so, we fell in love and moved to her city. [♪♪♪] [♪♪♪] >> i was introduced to this part of town while working on a campaign for gavin, who is running for mayor. i was one of the organizers out here and i met the people and i fell in love with them in the neighborhood. so it also was a place in the city that at the time that i could afford to buy a home and i wanted to own my own home.

this is where we laid down our roots like many people in this neighborhood and we started our family and this is where we are going to be. i mean we are the part of san francisco. it's the two neighborhoods with the most children under the age of 18. everybody likes to talk about how san francisco is not family-friendly, there are not a lot of children and families. we have predominately single family homes. as i said, people move here to buy their first home, maybe with multiple family members or multiple families in the same home and they laid down their roots. [♪♪♪] >> it's different because again, we have little small storefronts. we don't have light industrial space or space where you can

build high-rises or large office buildings. so the tech boom will never hit our neighborhood in that way when it comes to jobs. >> turkey, cheddar, avocado, lettuce and mayo, and little bit of mustard. that's my usual. >> mike is the owner, born and bred in the neighborhood. he worked in the drugstore forever. he saved his money and opened up his own spot. we're always going to support home grown businesses and he spent generations living in this part of town, focusing on the family, and the vibe is great and people feel at home. it's like a little community gathering spot. >> this is the part of the city

with a small town feel. a lot of mom and pop businesses, a lot of family run businesses. there is a conversation on whether starbucks would come in. i think there are some people that would embrace that. i think there are others that would prefer that not to be. i think we moved beyond that conversation. i think where we are now, we really want to enhance and embrace and encourage the businesses and small businesses that we have here. in fact, it's more of a mom and pop style business. i think at the end of the day, what we're really trying to do is encourage and embrace the diversity and enhance that diversity of businesses we already have. we're the only supervisor in the city that has a permanent district office. a lot of folks use cafes or use offices or different places, but

i want out and was able to raise money and open up a spot that we could pay for. i'm very fortunate to have that. >> hi, good to see you. just wanted to say hi, hi to the owner, see how he's doing. everything okay? >> yeah. >> good. >> we spend the entire day in the district so we can talk to constituents and talk to small businesses. we put money in the budget so you guys could be out here. this is like a commercial corridor, so they focus on cleaning the streets and it made a significant impact as you can see. what an improvement it has made to have you guys out here. >> for sure. >> we have a significantly diverse neighborhood and population. so i think that's the richness

of the mission and it always has been. it's what made me fall in love with this neighborhood and why i love it so much. remote meeting of the san francisco board of appeals. the presiding officer tonight joined by commissioner tina chang. we do have a vacancy. also president is deputy city attorney brad rasy with any

legal advice this evening. we will also be joined by representatives from the city departments that will be presenting before the board this evening. the board requests that you turn off all the devices. appellants, permit holders are given seven minutes to present their case and three minutes for rebuttal. members of public who are not affiliated with the parties have up to three minutes each and no rebuttal. for rehearing requests, the parties are given three minutes each with no rebuttal. mr. longway, our legal assistant will give a verbal warning 30 seconds before your

time is up. three votes are required to grant an appeal or a rehearing request or to modify a permit or determination. if you have questions about requesting a rehearing, the board rules, or hearing schedules, please e-mail board staff at sfgov.org. now, public access and participation are paramount to the board. sfgov tv is broadcasting and streaming this hearing live sfgov tv is also providing closed captioning for this meeting. a link to the livestream is found on the home page of our website at sfgov.org/boa. now, public comment can be provided in two ways. you can join the zoom meeting

by computer. go to the website for the zoom link or you can call by telephone. 1 (669) 900-6683 and sfgov tv is broadcasting and streaming the phone number and access instructions across the bottom of the screen if you're watching the livestream or broadcast. listen for the public comment of your item to be called. you will be brought into the hearing when it is your turn. our legal clerk will provide you 30 seconds before your time is up. please note it's very important that people calling in reduce or turn off the volume on their tvs or computers otherwise,

there is interference with the meeting. if any of the participants or attendees on zoom need ability accommodations or request help, send an e-mail to boardofappeals@sfgovtv.org. now, we will swear and affirm all those who intend to testify. please note, any member of the public may speak without being under oath. if you wish to have the board give your testimony, raise your right hand and say "i do" after you've been sworn in and affirmed. do you swear that the testimony you're about to give will be the whole truth and nothing but the truth. >> yes. >> so if you're a participant and you're not speaking, please put your zoom speaker on mute. we are moving on to item number

one which is general public comment. this is an opportunity for anyone who would like to speak on an item not on tonight's agenda? if so, please raise your hand. i see someone raising their hand. okay. jessica, please go ahead. >> hi, actually, this is jessica. i wanted to speak on behalf of something that's on the agenda. >> okay. so you just have to wait for that raise your hand when that comes up. >> okay. >> now the phone number 1008. did you want to speak?

your hand is raised? >> hello. can you hear me? >> yes. would you like to make general public comment? >> yes, i would. >> on an item that's not on tonight's agenda, correct? >> that is correct. >> okay. please go ahead, sir. >> my name is bob finebaum. i represent the owner of 23 obin place. about six months ago, there was an item on your agenda to remove eight trees of which one was 23 orbin place. at that time, several of us appeared at the board because the only tree that was not scheduled for replanting was the one at 23 orbin place. the board instructed the department to work with us.

now in december, we contacted the department and they have not gotening back to us with any determination. the department i presume or let me say somebody cut down that tree at 23 orbin place. i presume it was the department although since they don't answer letters, i can't be sure there is no reason since the board instructed the department to work with us, no reason that

this tree should not be planting. they and it is a red haring and because there is a street light, they said there kor problems. there was an existing cherry tree there for 20 years. a small tree will not cause problems and i wish this board would take a forceful action today and order the department to do what the right thing is and replace that tree. the owner has suggested z three options. >> clerk: 30 seconds. >> they're all within the city's small tree limits and we're asking that the board follow through by ordering the department to comply.

thank you very much. >> thank you. commissioner swig and then president honda. >> commissioner: can i get some direction on what we're able to do in response to this. >> director: i can follow up with mr. finebaum and the department tomorrow. >> commissioner: i would like that to happen and then we can satisfy the public's need or at least advise further action. thank you very much. >> director: thank you. president honda. >> president: i do remember that case and i do want to follow up. >> director: okay. we're still on public comment, so let me, mr. karnz. please go ahead. >> hello everyone.

>> hello, welcome. >> yeah. thank you. my name is lance kansas. i was the case that mr. foundbaum just referred to and the determination on that by the board of appeals was i guess the document shows the decision. here you go so at the this is held on the condition that you advised and require by the property owner so i've also not heard anything back i've not seen a revised order so i would concur with mr. finebaum's i

appreciate it if you take care of his condition as well. thank you. >> thank you, mr. kansas. is there any other general public comment? please raise your hand. okay. i do not see any further comments. so we will move on to item number 2. commissioner comments and questions. >> i have one. >> we can't hear you, president honda. you just went on mute. >> president: sorry. first of all, i would like to thank our vice president who has just resigned for his service on this board. he was an amazing addition to the five members that are here. sad to see him go. i do wish him the very best in all his future endeavors. also since we have a vacant seat i'd like to elect a

nomination for that vacant office position. >> thank you. we can put that on the next agenda. commissioner swig. >> commissioner: i'd like to echo president honda's comments on commissioner santacana. he terminated his activity too short, but unfortunately, you have to be a resident of san francisco to be here but he did a great job and i want to thank him for supporting our efforts. >> okay. any other commissioner comments and questions. is there any public comment on this item? if so, please raise your hand. okay. i don't see any public comment, so we will move on to item number three. commissioners, before you for possible discussion of the meetings for the march 20,

2021, meeting. >> president: may i have a motion to accept those minutes. >> commissioner: motion to accept the minutes. >> okay. is there any public comment on that motion to adopt the minutes. i do not see any public comment. on that motion to adopt. [roll call] that motion carries 4-0 and the minutes are adopted. so we are now moving on to item number four. item number four is a rehearing request for appeal number 21-03. 4840 mission street appellants are requesting a rehearing. padula and vasquez versus the department building inspection sited march 20th, 2021. the board voted 5-0 to deny the

appeal and uphold the permit on the basis it was properly issued. the permit holder is bridge housing corporation and to demolish a type five three-story mortuary. and we will hear from the requesters first. i believe their attorney, mr. chapman will be speaking on their behalf. >> good evening. david chapman. yes, we would like the board to consider granting a rehearing request on the basis outlined in the letters that we've sent on april 5th, 2021, this is a request hearing by the board regarding permit 20 and we that

we believe that the reasoning behind the denial was incorrect and, since then, there have been new developments namely, they're contrary to the responses pleading by attorney vital. there has been an ongoing problem with garbage on the site and it's essentially, we understand that currently, there is typically at times a security guard on the property, but they're not always present resulting in essentially a nuisance, ongoing nuisance condition and there's homeless encampments and general threat to the security and health and safety of my client, ms. vasquez. and, as you may recall, the

breezeway of the subject bridge development project borders ms. vasquez's property such that the entire length of her house will essentially be a walkway and this will be used by the residents of the low income housing, the concern which i believe is a valid concern is that my client's health and safety will be affected by this. she essentially, this was her mother's house. she now lives in this house and to basically, the change and the nature of the environment surrounding her home is rather drastic we do view this as a taking applause based on the real estate agents and brokers

that my client has spoken with. >> clerk: 30 seconds. >> as well as the local police department, they've indicated there will be an increase in crime and the property values will go down. we also understand that there will be liquifaction and pilings will have to be drilled into the ground because of the structure. because this is not a flood plain, it will affect. >> clerk: that's time. thank you. >> thank you, mr. chapman. we have a question from president honda. >> president: counselor, understanding the rules for a rehearing is quite strict and the bar is high to meet. and, after going through your brief quite thoroughly, what specifically was not brought up in the last hearing that would cause manifest injust? >> thank you. for one thing, my understanding

is that ms. vasquez did not have an opportunity to speak on the last hearing. we believe that would result in manifest injustice. >> thank you. okay. we will now hear from the permit holder bridge housing. is mr. bettal present? >> yes, i am. i'm here on behalf of bridge housing corporation. there's no extraordinary circumstances here that would warrant a the new

construction. finally, granting we're hearing a significant delay.

that requires significant and qualifying projects must be administered without delay for each of these reasons, we urge the board to deny the rehearing. thank you. >> thank you. commissioner swig. >> commissioner: i just realized that disclosure should have been made on my behalf. in no way will that -- will their presence influence me in any way with regard to a decision on my thinking on this case. thank you. >> okay. we will now hear from the planning department, mr. sanchez. >> thank you. scott sanchez from the planning

department. first want to thank mr. santacana and i wish him the best of luck in his new endeavors as well. now to the matters at hand. i also concur with the permit holder's response that this does not meet the board high standards. the rehearing request arguments are incorrect and misrepresent sb35 which is meant to say all historical landmarks are for the taking. that's not true.

this is only dealing with the demolition permit the board denied that jurisdiction request. i believe this is now the third hearing on this property. first, we have the jurisdiction request on the new construction permit and now the appeal of the demolition permit and now the rehearing of the demolition request. we believe the permits were properly issued and i'm available for questions. thank you. >> okay. thank you. we will now hear from the department of building inspection. deputy derek duffy. welcome. >> evening commissioners. i just want to wish vice president santacana. it was a pleasure working with

him while he was on the board. in this case, i don't have anything from d.b.i. to add to the hearing of this request. >> thank you. is there any public comment on this item. if so, please raise your hand. okay. go ahead. >> madam director? >> director: yes. >> president: since we've had a full hearing on this and the body of the appeals and i believe our last case is going to have a large volume of public comment, i'm reducing public comment to 90 seconds, a minute and a half. >> director: 90 seconds. okay. mr. barba. you wanted to provide public comment on this item. we can't hear you. mr. barbara, i see your hand is

raised. can you unmute yourself, please. mr. barber. >> i think he has the tv on in the background. >> director: did you want to provide public comment on this item, mr. barbara? >> ms. rosenburg. >> director: i believe aren't you the partner or the request of the you live with one of the requesters. >> that is my spout. >> director: okay. so you are unable to speak during public comment. at the last hearing, you did speak in error. we were juggling. alec had lost connectivity so we didn't realize it. because you -- she is your spouse, you have to use the time allotted to her if i

believe mr. longway told her that today or before the hearing. so you cannot provide public comment. >> okay. thank you. >> director: is there anyone who wants to provide public comment for this item? please raise your hand. okay. commissioners, this matter is submitted. >> president: so, first of all, as i mentioned to the counselor, the bar for rehearing is quite high. i believe that all information and after reading extensively through the brief, the information that was provided could or would have been provided or wasn't provided at the previous hearing and just to let everyone know, with sb35, we are required by the city charter to hear these appeals because of the city charter, but, at this point, we

have very limited powers of what we can do and specifically after going over the property landmark. if the property has been landmarked, unfortunately, whether it could have been or would have been is not the fact of the day. the day is whether it was landmarked at the time. and so sb35 does not require if the property is not landmarked. so in my opinion, there's no reason to grant a bill for a rehearing. >> commissioner: i completely concur and happy to make the motion unless you wish to unless one of the other commissioners has a different point of view. >> president: if any other commissioner has something to say. if not, commissioner lazarus.

>> [inaudible] >> director: i'm sorry. there's no comment at this time. >> commissioner: yeah. i will move to deny the request either whether there is new information on manifest injustice. >> director: okay. we have a motion from commissioner lazarus. on that motion, [roll call] so that motion carries 4-0 and the request is denied. thank you. we will now move on to item number four this is appeal number 21-014. subject property is 443 cole street. appealing the issuance on

february 9, 2021. this is permit number 2021-02094313 and we will hear from the appellants first. >> good afternoon. my name's jonathan kathryan. i represent the appellants jim williamson and cathy kosley. the issue's quite simple tonight and it comes down to the building does not have the authorization of all the property owners and therefore cannot make this application and the department of building inspections cannot authorize the work. there are few other sub issues that i'll get in to. but, if i may, can i please share my screen. >> director: sure. please go ahead. okay. we can see it, the permit. >> yeah. let's zoom in just a little bit

here. so you can see the application here and i'd like to just draw your attention to a few things. the very first one is that the application is signed by the applicant who is here tonight. but the property is a two-unit hoa and it's 441 cole street that my clients own and 443 cole that the applicant owns and there are common areas that are managed by the h.o.a.. and, in the description here on the page, you can see that the work done is described as remodel hallway bathroom, legalize laundry area, ground floor, add car charge outlet in garage, work is on the first floor laundry area, no framing. the association manages all the common areas and the common

areas include an area that's not one of the units. so in this specific example, the association manages the electrical systems, the plumbing systems and the garage. all three of those are being it's not clear if this is one laundry area, two laundry areas. is the ground floor the same as the first floor. i won't show the condo map, but when you look at the condo map, it adds to the lack of clarity on what areas we're talking about. but it's quite clear that in a picture if the plug is going

here, that's a common area, there are other examples. but that's one obvious one. if you scroll down here, i'm sure all the commissioners but quite simply one of our attachments here is that there's an authorization form that would be a standard form that all the property owners need to sign when applying for a building permit. my clients and the h.o.a. have not signed that form. of course, there's another version of that form that would include everybody's information. the area of the work, this laundry area also includes hvac equipment that includes

asbestos. we have an expert contractor available to speak to this, but the area includes asbestos and paint. they're not identified and from our research, our understanding is that the contractor who would be doing this work is not qualified to deal with asbestos or paint. we also question whether planning department review is necessary because this description is unclear and the way that the units are laid out, the first and second floor units which are both a portion of the applicant's units are not connected, we question whether there's a planning issue here because it could be a creation of the living space, for example, finishing bathrooms, adding laundry

areas. is that the creation of the living space that needs to be permitted or reviewed by planning. so for all these reasons, but most particularly that my clients in the h. o. a. have not authorize the. >> director: thank you. we do have a question from president honda. >> president: yeah. the question is, and i vaguely remember that the permit application there was a question that vaguely asked if this was a condo. is that -- >> let me pull this back up. >> president: maybe that's deputy director in filling the

application d.b.i., there was a box that said is this a condo or not. acting director joseph duffy. >> i think the question is is it a standard. >> commissioner: president honda, i don't think there's anything on the application form. >> president: i remember seeing something asking if it was a condo. >> i'm not aware of that on the form, on the application form. it just asked for the occupancy and the use residential, but i don't think there's anything on our building permit applications that i'm aware of that defines it as a condo building. >> president: thank you, joe.

sorry about that. >> director: thank you. so mr. kathryn, you're done with your presentation for now? >> i should add and i want to make sure i hit this point as you can see on the application, there is electrical and plumbing work and we would expect that there would be permits pulled for that which work has started and we're not aware of those permits. but that is all. >> director: okay. thank you. we'll now hear from the permit holder, i believe mr. casey bellway will be speaking on behalf of the permit holder. >> actually, i'll be speaking first. >> director: okay. welcome. >> thank you. >> director: please go ahead. you have seven minutes. >> thank you executive director rosenburg for the opportunity to speak to the board. president honda, commissioners swig, lazarus and chang, i want

to thank you for this. my name is aza boarham. i am the owner of four hundred forty-three cole street. this is a two-unit condominium unit. my unit occupies the garage level and the first floor while the appellant's unit occupies the second and third floors. to remodel my hallway bathroom, legalize my laundry room and add an outlet for an ev car charger for my exclusive use parking spot. the reality is is that i have a 20-year-old bathroom that has tired looking plumbing fixtures. i'm replacing light for light and my toilet and shower fixtures. i'm replacing tile and painting which does not require permits. i also understand the inspector will likely require a bathroom fan that i will intend to comply with this.

my laundry hook-ups are in place from the prior owner of the building i bought in 1997. they are located entirely within the garage floor level of my unit. the ev outlet proposed would be installed in my exclusive use parking space and hooked up to my electrical panel which is already separate from the appellant's electrical panel. prior to my contractor applying for permits, the appellants through their attorneys had asked me to go to mediation about other matters which i agreed to and participated. i then notified the appellants' attorney that i hired a licensed contractor and that permits would be pulled for minor improvements. additionally, i shared my intention to get a permit for an ev outlet for the purpose of allowing electrical vehicle charging in my exclusive use parking spot. as i said, my contractor, level

eight construction applied for three permits. building, electrical, and plumbing. once the building permits were granted, demolition began. appellants had the right to meet demands and to stop all work in my unit. to be clear, there was never any work performed on any common area component nor was there any -- there was -- nor was there ever any indication ever given to the appellants that there would be work performed on the common area. at that point, we received the electrical or plumbing permit, we had received them and i was still discussing things with by the attorneys especially since the city hadn't requested plans in support of the permit application filed by the contractor on my behalf.

shortly thereafter, the attorneys filed their appeal and my underlying permit was suspended. as a result, ooth my contractor applied for the permits, they were not issued because the entire permit was suspended in february. the attorneys also had their attorney into bully me into letting them come inspect the interior of my unit. so they would decide whether or not to allow me to change out my plumbing fixtures in the bathroom. the letter informed me that they would be coming in to my unit and if i did not let them in, they would charge me their attorney fees and consulting fees. this type of intimidation and harassment is just a snid bit of what i've been dealing with for years with these people who i guess now are wasting your time too by requiring you to

reconsider whether you properly grant my permit request to work on plumbing fixtures located inside my unit. laundry hook-ups inside my unit and the ez outlet that serves only my unit. i have never had any intentions of having any work performed without the appropriate work performed. by the way, the appellants and i had an all-day mediation already. it was last friday, april 9th, but it was unsuccessful. for some reason, the applicants still seem to feel that they, one, have the right to inspect my interior of my separate interest unit and, number two, they have the legal authority to approve or deny the proposed work. this is simply not true. i really don't understand how this got twisted into a federal case, but sadly it did. clearly repairs and maintenance in my unit without approval or

interference from an unincorporated association for any individual member. i guess if they want to take me to court over this, then they're going to do what they're going to do. so i'm here before you. i seriously don't know whether i should be laughing or i should be crying or perhaps a little bit of both. the reality is is that we're talking about very basic work that has been on hold since february. the appellants have no right to approve or deny the proposed work under the law or the associations. and is simply holding me hostage at this point. the fact that the appellants want to trace through my unit with their attorney and the construction does not obligate me to allow them to do so nor is it a reason for them to file the appeal. at this point, the bathroom's complete gutted. and my leasing agent has a family that wants to move in. we can't get this lease signed because we don't have a start

date. my leasing agent is going to speak for a few minutes. i'm am requesting you to deny the appellant's appeal and reinstate my permit. thank you very much. >> director: thank you. president honda, did you want to ask a question or hear from the agent first. you're on mute. >> president: they have 30 seconds left. i'll let them finish. >> director: okay. >> i'll use that 30 seconds. >> director: okay. and you'll have time in rebuttal as well. >> my name is casey bellway. i've worked azah since 2013. i having party to a bit of the antagonistic behavior by the appellants. azah is a fantastic landlord. i've rented her property for her five times. all of her tenants loved her. her neighbors love her. we had a family who've wanted to rent the property for quite

awhile and because they've put this hold on her basic permit. >> clerk: that's time. i'm sorry. >> director: you'll have time in rebuttal. president honda. >> president: yeah. since you are a member of the board of realtors, i mean, you understand that this is not a single-family home. that this is a condominium and it's subject to h.o.a. and c.c.n.r.s covenants and restrictions. simply put, in a single-family home, you own the dirt to the ground and you own the sky and you allow planes and airways to go through it. in a homeowner's association, you actually do not own the walls in your unit, you own the air space within, the h.o.a. actually owns all that space. so whether it's in the unit or not at which point, it's still subject to the homeowner's association and the c.c.n.r.s. are you familiar with that, sir? >> i am. and i'm also of the

understanding that her c.c. nvmentd r.s allowed for her to do basic repairs. >> president: so basic repairs and full remodel are a little different. license issues and replacing faucets as your client said she has gutted her whole bathroom, correct? >> i mean, it's basically fixtures and a broken floor. they're not moving plumbing or electrical to my knowledge. >> president: thank you. that was my questions. >> director: thank you. we will now hear from the planning department, mr. sanchez. >> thank you. scott sanchez from the planning department. legalize laundry, adding the car charger outlet in the garage, it actually was not reviewed by the planning department given the scope of the work that was outlined. staff noted the scope and are not applicable for our review. it seems that most of the issues raised have been related to the h.o.a. and whether

proper permit authorization has been given since the building permits are their vehicles and they will regulate whether or not someone has proper authorization. the appellant raised some possible concerns about resound. i would note and the board may not be aware of this yet, but we used to have a policy in place for several decades related to development on ground floors what would be allowed in terms of bathrooms and other amenities and earlier this month, that zoning administerer bulletin was revoked. so that is no longer in effect. even had it still would it still be in effect today, it really wouldn't be applicable. you can remodel, you can legalize a laundry in the rooms. there's nothing in the scope of work that gives me great concern. legalizing laundry room. it'd be nice to get a little more information about what that means, exactly. but if it it's really just legalizing the fixtures and

installing the devices, that wouldn't require a planning department review. that's generally going to be allowed no matter what. so happy to be available for any questions. but i think this is more for deputy director duffy. thank you. >> director: thank you. we will now hear from the department building inspection. >> dbi, the permit under appeal remodel hallway bathroom, legalize laundry and adding car charger in the garage. it was filed on the 9st of february 2021. it was issued and then suspended on the 25th of february, 2021. the cost evaluation of $15,000 on it. it goes through the planning department but it was na which i think is correct and then approved by our building plan check. so we -- some of the issues that were brought up by the appellant and, you know what,

on these types of permits, they're pretty simple building permits and simple for d.b.i. because we see these types of permits all the time, we issue thousands of them every year. when you start getting into condos and c.c.n.r.s, that's really not our business either. the general contractor obtaining the building permit actually isn't the problem either. d.b.i. has a policy that a general contractor can obtain a permit without the owner's. it changes if someone comes on behalf of the owner and they're not a general contractor. but i checked today with the manager of [inaudible] bureau and i think we've dealt with this before at the board of appeals. but the permit is a pulled by a general contractor and i recognize that i belief.

so therefore that permit was properly issued by dbi on that matter. on the electrical and plumbing permits, they wouldn't have gotten any building inspections and sometimes i think what happens is the building permit, it always comes first and then you have to reference that building permit when you get the electrical and plumbing permits. i'm not sure how much work they got done but they did need them and they would not have received any building inspections without the electrical and plumbing and would have indeed needed to have that work. so i would doubt very much if they were going to get very much further. the fact they couldn't get them in after that because the building permit was suspended. so the permit, we would imagine that the electrical and plumbing permits are going to be issued and that can be done online actually and it's a pretty simple permit to get for a licensed contractor. the only issues i had with the

permit is i think that it should go to the contractor. they only had $15,000 for the evaluation and that's very low. it's probably double or triple for the cost of that. i don't think you can get that work done for $15,000 and that's something our building inspector is going to remind them. you need to pay additional fees. you've low-balled the permit. at this point, i'm available for any questions. i think there were other issues raised but i'd rather the commissioners ask. >> director: thank you. we have a question from commissioner swig then president honda. >> commissioner: good afternoon. sir, how are you today? >> good, commissioner swig. thank you. >> commissioner: i was looking at this and i really need your advice on this. this kind of straddles the line of what we have faced many,

many times as to whether this is a dispute in a homeowner's association or whether this belongs as a an appeal on a building permit. and as president honda noted that there are also some guidelines as to legal guidelines as to whether something is a major renovation or an upgrade and so i'd like your opinion on this. ironically or coincidentally yours truly and with my permit, mr. duffy from the city of san francisco, i recently did similar work in my house and i would consider it a -- and why did my wife want it? because the building was warn out, the fixtures were warn out

and they needed a refurbishment and i wouldn't consider it a major renovation although it did cost more than $15,000, i agree with you. what is this, mr. duffy? is this a major renovation or is this a refurbishment and did you look at this as an hoa dispute? i need your help on that or do you see it as something which merits our discussion today as a permit dispute? >> i think primarily it is a dispute between the two condo owners. and to be honest with you, like we do see disputes between hoa and condo owners and rules and regulations not stuff like this, but condo owners and hoas and we do get drawn into them as well. but i do think that is primarily probably what it is,

but in addition, the building permit itself, again, it just seems like a cosmetic upgrade, and someone's trying to do improvements inside their condo and adding a car charger, i think that's a really good idea whether that breaks the safety or the rules, that's not a dbi issue. you know. even on that one. i'm not even sure that you maybe able to do that work on an electrical permit and i actually needed to check that. i didn't have the answer to that. but on the building permit, whether that's allowed under the rules because it's a common area. someone said it's not. you know, we don't get into that. but i do think ultimately the other work in the bathroom and legalizing the laundry room. i would call it a minor improvement to the interior of the unit. >> commissioner: now that you know, does it automatically go

back to you to deal with the $15,000 issue was now that you've discovered that it might be a little light on the estimate, are you going to handle that or should that be a worry of ours? >> no. we can handle that. if the permit went ahead, we could easily let the building inspector know and the owner will know tonight when they get the decision that they need to give us -- that they need to pay us some additional fees to reflect the actual cost. we can do that by a correction notice amendment. it happens all the time. it's not unusual, but for some reason it's probably -- i think it should have been a bit higher myself, you know. we can ask them for the estimate to show us the contract if they're doing all that work for $15,000. i guess if he is, there would be a lot of people hiring. >> commissioner: i'll call him because mine was a lot more than that.

>> director: thank you. president honda. >> president: you answered the same question. similar question. so the condo owner on the lower section, she has all rights according to d.b.i. to pull out our her licensed professional to pull out a permit and have that executed and if it's in violation of the h.o.a. or ccnrs that's going to be separate and has nothing to do with us? >> yeah. i believe so. the building permit is on parcel 1336, that's 048 which is 443 cole street and there is a different block allot for 441 cole street. i just checked that. i mean, i guess technically the car charger is that in 048 or is that in a separate a lot of these condos don't have a separate lot number for the common areas so they take the

one they're working on and add the work. i think the only issue would be the car charger whether that's in -- it's not inside the unit so to speak, but does the building even have a [inaudible] for the garage? it probably doesn't. a lot of them don't have the separate lot number for the common areas which is a problem for a lot of condo owners actually. they having to end up using the low number sometimes if they're doing work in a common area, we have to pick a lot number for one of the units. they put the lot number in the common areas. i don't know what would be done this. >> president: okay. and the other question is is the laundry room in the unit or is that also in the common area and is that properly issued? >> well, i don't know that. that would be a question for the permit holder. that's not described over this kind of permit plan. >> president: that's a question for the permit holder

azah. >> hi. thank you president honda. i did include it on the condo map i sent you. it is in my unit, the laundry area. it is in my unit. it's not common area at all. >> president: perfect thank you. no more questions. >> director: thank you. we are now moving on to public comment. is there any public comment on this item. if so, please raise your hand. okay. i don't see any public comment. so we will move on to rebuttal. mr. kathrine you have three minutes. >> thank you. i'm going to share my screen again. >> director: okay. we'll start your time after you get your -- okay. we see some plans. >> this is the configuration of the -- thank you. this is a configuration of the lower floor as you can see

labeled garage level and this area here is clearly a shared garage. so without a doubt, the electric vehicle charger is in shared space and for any of that work or other work, there's been no authorization from the h.o.a. or the other property owner. we have kevin kerne and i wonder if we can pause our time for just a moment to see if he's able to speak. he's available. sorry. president honda, do you have a question? >> president: i'm going to wait until your time is finished. >> director: we'll pause the time to see if the other speaker's here given that we're using technology. who did you want to speak? >> kevin kerne is our construction expert and he's been in the unit. >> director: okay. are you going to continue the time or should we get him on?

>> let's get him on. >> clerk: time is paused at 2:18. >> director: okay. mr. kerne. >> hi, how are you. >> director: hi. welcome. >> so i've been a general contractor in 41 years. i've worked very closely with the san francisco building department in that time. i've renovated hundreds of buildings in san francisco and have legal expert business and resolved these types of issues. my concerns here were because of the age of the building it's part in 1978, when they took out the walls and gutted the bathroom, there was lead paint in that plaster or dry waul i'm positive and it had to be tested to prove that it wasn't or a lead paint abatement contractor had to abate it. we don't know if that was done. that could possibly launch lead paint dust throughout the building. secondly, i know because i

inspected the common furnace myself that there is asbestos on the old sheet metal pipes. so, often if you know these old buildings, the boots that connect the old sheet metal pipes in the different rooms, bathrooms, bedrooms have asbestos on them. that would need to be abated by an hvac contractor that has that qualification or an abatement contractor. so my concerns were those, plus, once the walls were open and my understanding is that everything in the walls is h.o.a. property, this building probably has galvanized pipes, knob and tube wiring and all those things need to be addressed. i work very closely with joe duffy and all the building inspectors at d.b.i. and i'm quite familiar with all these

issues. >> clerk: 30 seconds. >> director: thank you. you have 30 seconds left if you wanted to use that time. >> thank you all for letting me testify and if you have any questions i'm here to answer them. >> and just as a final thought, fundamentally, this is work being done on somebody's property without their permission and undeniably the garage area and i think we can debate the other areas. the garage area with the electrical charger isn't shared space. >> director: thank you. we have a question from president honda and then commissioner lazarus. >> president: counselor, did you understand what the deputy director of the building inspection department indicated that the permits were properly issued and that is a private litigation between your client and the lower unit and i do agree with the exception of the electrical which is in a common area in the garage. >> i understand that and i was

hoping to find an assessor parcel map to determine for sure whether there was a different parcel for the garage but i was unable to do that quickly. >> director: thank you. commissioner lazarus, you're muted. >> commissioner: yes, my question is on what basis were you demanding entrance into the permit holder's unit? >> so there's an ongoing dispute among the unit owners and so this actually followed after a request for resolution was issued from our office, you know, on behalf of our clients for exterior repair work that the applicant has not authorized and so it's exterior repair work to the building, dry rot and paint. and so upon receiving our request for resolution which is the private matter not in front

of the board today, we were told that the applicant was sort of in retaliation taking out permits to do other work without h.o.a. approval. so we've been in mediation and other discussions. >> director: okay. thank you. we will now hear from the permit holder, i believe mr. casey bellway will be speaking. you have three minutes. >> thank you. i'm her real estate agent. >> director: right. but you're the agent for the permit holder, so you're representing her. >> yeah. i mean, what we've seen in this hearing today, this is -- >> excuse me. i'm the permit holder. >> director: okay. let's pause the time. you said you wanted him to speak at this point. do you want him to take the 30 minutes or do you want to share it? we can't hear you now. so do you want to speak.

>> i'll speak. can you hear me? okay. just to be really clear, the parking is basically is exclusively my parking spot and if you look at the ccnrs, the definition are that both the internal and external wiring designed to serve a single unit belongs to that, so the electrical vehicle charger, you can see in the ccnrs and the next piece i wanted to bring up was those pictures that were shown just so you're aware, they went into my unit unauthorized to get in there to look at that heater, they would of had to get my permission to enter my bottom unit and they entered illegally in there. so i find this really troublesome that i'm finding out about this right now. this is very disturbing that

they would be taking pictures and then sharing that as evidence. i'm not doing work in that area where that if you look inside that area where the water heaters are, i'm not doing any work in there at all. but it's very interesting that they went in there, took pictures, brought their attorney, you know, their expert to go through there without my permission. it's very disturbing. i will have to be following up on this. but i want you all to be very clear that are ccnrs and they can take me to court because i believe this is a ccnr dispute at this point. and the wiring that would be in there would be belong to the unit parking spot. similarly, if they wanted to add an ev charger, it would belong to them. >> director: okay.

thank you. are you finished? >> yes. please. thank you. >> clerk: there's a minute left. >> casey, if you can finish up your section. >> yeah. so as i mentioned earlier, i've known azah to be an incredibly responsible landlord. when i first started renting this, the first time i advertised this property, her up stairs neighbors immediately sent me an e-mail and they tried to insert themselves inside our rental process and tenant nuisance to all the tenants she's had in there and my general understanding with the situation of the complaints on her permits is simply they're trying to antagonize her and make it impossible for her to rent her unit. she's made a basic request to refresh a bathroom and it's pretty ridiculous we're in here

today. >> director: okay. thank you. we will now hear from the planning department, mr. sanchez. anything further. >> nothing further to add. thank you. >> deputy director duffy, anything further? >> no. nothing further for me either. >> director: okay. we do have a question from commissioner swig. >> commissioner: since it was brought up, how do you deal with the issues of um, the potential for asbestos or other items which may be in the walls may be related as typical in old san francisco buildings? i live in an old house. it was built in '26 or '27 i believe in the walls are things that are almost 100 years old.

i'm not touching them, but how do you -- where is the point that those items become -- have an impact on a simple refor surement or renovation? >> really good question, commissioner swig. i should of spoken to that because i did hear it brought up by mr. karney. you show, when d.b.i. receives such a kwiry whether it be from a property owner or complaint from a neighbor, we would generally refer the asbestos quality management and

>> hi earn. my name is faye wong. i did not see anything that before 1970s on the walls. by the way, the walls are not taken out yet. we simply have removed all the fixtures. took out the vanity sink, the

mirror, the tiles on the floor and that's the expense of the work that was being done. >> commissioner: just to clarify, you weren't disturbing any encasements that might contain asbestos and lead paint. >> that's correct. >> director: thank you. so commissioners, this matter's submitted. >> president: would any commissioner like to start first? >> commissioner: i'm happy to start. i heard clearly from the department of building inspection and the planning department that the permit was properly issued. so, to me, i don't hear basis for granting the appeal, but i'd like to hear from my other commissioners. >> president: anyone else? i will concur with commissioner

chang. i believe that this is a personal matter between the upper and lower unit and according to the department, it was properly issued. commissioner chang, would you like to make a motion. >> commissioner: i will do my best. i move to deny the appeal on the basis that the permit was properly issued. >> president: bingo, that was good. >> commissioner: perfect. >> director: okay, we have a motion from commissioner to deny the appeal on that motion it was properly issued. [roll call] so that motion carries 4-0. and the appeal is denied. so we are now moving on to item number six. this is appeal number 21-011. richard miller and shelli meneghetti. subject property is 3627

divisadero street. appealing the issuance on february 2, 2021, to mickey pucko, of a site permit. two bedrooms to five bedrooms and two bathrooms to five bathrooms. adding a fourth level penthouse. this is permit number two hundred one billion eight hundred twelve million two hundred seventy-nine thousand two hundred sixty-seven. you have two minutes. are the appellants present? mr. miller or ms. meneghetti? okay. i don't see that they're present. can you raise your hand if you're present, if you're having technical difficulties. they did not supply a brief as well. so, mr. longway, i understand

you spoke to one of them at one point i believe prior to the hearing. did they indicate they were going to attend? >> i believe they were. and they were given notice by our zoom invite to join the meeting. i can give them a call. >> director: why don't we just give them a call, please. thank you for your patience, everyone. >> president: i believe they should be aware of this process. i mean, reading through the briefs, she is an officer or one of the parties is an officer of the court.

>> president: commissioner swig. it was pretty cool, you just walked through your background. >> commissioner: did you have a psychedelic experience. >> president: it was just like wow. that was kind of cool. i should try that on a zoom conference some time.

>> clerk: i just left a message for the appellant richard miller. there was no response to any voice. i don't know if you want to commence with the permit holders. i don't know. >> director: president honda. i think we should go ahead and hear from the permit holder. >> president: i'm going to step in and say let's go ahead and continue with this hearing. considering the appellants didn't prepare a brief. they're quite aware of how an appeal works. >> director: thank you. we will now hear from the permit holder. >> hello, can you hear me. >> director: yes. welcome. >> do i just go. >> director: sure. have you seven minutes.

>> thank you very much. good afternoon, commissioners. my name is mickey pucko and i'm the permit holder for 3627 divisadero street. now they didn't even show up to this hearing. i know i would love to share my screen if that's okay. >> director: sure. can you pause the time, alex. >> here we go. can you see it? >> director: no. we cannot see it. >> better? >> director: okay. we see it now. >> i know i have been accused of being a developer but i'm not a developer. i'm not going to use this home for airbnb rentals. as you can see we have seven working adults in our family and now we all work from home, we just need the space. we have our first grand baby on the way and we're super excited about it and unfortunately,

instead of enjoying our family time, we are spending our time in resources fighting these appeals and trying to deal with these neighbors. i'm going to move to next screen where i had reached out to them twice asking if they wanted to get together if they wanted to discuss the matter, if there's any common ground we can find. we just need to communicate even during the v.r. process with david winslow from the planning department. he reached out to them twice and they just flat out refused to have a conversation with anyone. as far as the project goes, the appellants challenged the same project through d.v.r. process and they were denied. the project has not changed in size of scope. does not require any variances. it's fully code compliant and our permit was issued on february 2, 2021. ms. meneghetti in her letter,

she you know, the kind of sad ask we're not part of the historic resource, so design our home to fit more with existing neighboring homes we agreed and worked closely with r-dot and this is now what's in front of you as you can see on this drawing here, we set our home up. third story. we have similar roof line. this is kind of what the home's going to look like once when it's finished. in terms of the broader neighborhood context, the project fits. this is our home here. just across the street from the elementary school that is currently going through the major remodel. it is occupying the entire block, it's 40' in height and solid mass. we also have a huge presence of

four story buildings in the marina. over 400 stories in the marina and our block has ten 4-story buildings as you can see here. we also took lots of work as trying to minimize any impacts to our neighbors and we subordinated a fourth floor 16' back. you can see on the bottom image here that the 4th floor is very visible from the street level. sitting 16' here. required anywhere between 5 and 15 feet here. we also have [inaudible] here that was 48", but we agreed to do fire rated roof and that actually reduce the wall from 48" to 6" which is further minimizing impact on light, privacy, or pretty much anything to our neighbors.

let me see. on this image here, you can see that we tried to minimize any affects to our neighbors. so we have 5' setbacks here from the property homes. we don't have any windows and then obviously we can further provide any privacy through privacy landscape. same goes here since we had to set our third story back, privacy landscape is a great way of reserving privacy and both sides can actually do the same. so this is a little bit as far as how our house is sitting among the neighboring projects. so this is appellant's meneghetti's home, this is miller's home. millers have remodeled their home in 2018 and they've added

mass and height and when we had the discussion as far as our home we'll only be sitting 5' above their home. ms. miller on our last meeting on january 25th, his attorney for san francisco she recommended that even if the project passes and reviewed and gets approved her husband richard miller will appeal the site to delay or block the project. not quite sure what they're doing right now as far as not showing up to this briefing. also, this is ms. miller's home here. so she has a deck that has zero site setbacks and she has pretty much direct view into our bedroom and i'm very happy we have blinds and kind of high density community. kind of is what it is. not much we can do about that. as you can see here on this image, bear with me for two

seconds. so this is our home here, this is miller's home and what they've done is they enclosed the light well here and they enclosed it and created a private skyline just for themselves and the skylight is bringing light to their staircase only. not their living room, not their bedroom, nothing common, it's literally their staircase. furthermore, can you see they have the fire department was asking to put this in and so their lightwell is fully shaded throughout the year pretty much and our project and our building will not cause any further shading to them. so this is another show casing here that it's sitting just above their staircase. >> clerk: 30 seconds. >> and then, you know, they have plenty of light coming through their front and back

doors and windows, but, as you can see from these images, they are just choosing to close up the blinds because too much light and they don't want to have their furniture ruined. so, you know, there's additional examples here of the other projects recently approved where they have four story buildings and anywhere between 5' to 15'. >> clerk: that's the time. >> director: we do have a question from president honda. >> president: my question is do you do this professionally because your brief and presentation was well done and as you stated in your brief, you are the permit holder there. the appellants and you have to provide a brief without them providing a brief which is kind of challenging, you're answering questions that there's no questions for. >> right. thank you. >> president: you pretty much answered most of mine. so the question i had in reviewing the brief was that i noticed that both properties, your property is the lowest in that block face as well as it

looks like the appellant's property was fairly new and as you see it was done in 2018. were you currently living at the property in 2018? >> absolutely. we were pretty much put together through the entire construction and all the banging and all the noise. not once have we filed anything. >> president: so that was my next question. did they have any conversation with you in regards to you didn't dr their permit you did not appeal their permit, you let them build and did they have any restrictions when they built such a large property next to your property? >> yeah. no. there was no restrictions and i was really surprised to see them file this. >> president: i think that was the last of my questions. as i always say, no good deed goes unpunished. >> [ laughter ] true that. >> director: okay. thank you. we will now hear from the planning department. mr. sanchez. >> thank you. scott sanchez planning

department. the subject property is 3627 divisadero street. it's a two-story vertical addition. it's maintaining the building as a sing-family dwelling. there's been quite a bit of process on this project. the permit holder submitted a review request back in september of 2018 to get feedback on the design, the building permit was submitted on december of 2018. the neighborhood noifs was performed between one thousand two hundred nineteen. two discretionary reviews were filed and one of those is the appellant and this mattered tonight. the planning commission heard this as a discretionary view on may 7th at the hearing, the planning commission voted to not take discretionary review.

the project is completely code compliant as has been noted by the permit holder and i debris the permit holder's presentation was quite thorough and good use of materials there. the planning department found this to be compliant with the residential design guidelines. as it's been noted, there's a context of four story buildings as well as opposite the school. then that third floor that is proposed is set back 5' from the building all similar to that of the two adjacent properties and the fourth floor addition which is quite small is set back 16' from the front building wall and hidden behind a parapit. so it's visible. unfortunately, there's no brief filed by the appellant. even in the appeal itself, there was no preliminary statement of appeal. no brief filed and no attendance at the hearing tonight. so we don't know what if any concerns there are about the

project. i i think some questions and concerns that were raised and some of the public comment that was received, i can note that the subject building is not a historic resource. it did undergo an environmental review and found to not be a historic resource. it was recategorized to a c classification. so the determination is final. there were some concerns related to possible use as a short-term rental. any short-term rental use would need to comply with our permitting process which is very highly enforced and regulated. there was some concerns about maybe a future additional units or use of the property as higher density and they have some parking requirements, but there are no parking requirements in the city anymore. so the project is completely code compliant.

in the future, if more units were added there wouldn't be required to add parking. it's difficult to kind of know what the issue is on appeal to the board because no statement has been made. i can actually recall a hearing like this where nothing has been submitted at all and yet we were holding a hearing and trying to, you know, if i can tell you the permit was properly approved. it's code compliant. there were no errors or mistakes here so we would respectfully request that the board approved issue answer of the permit and deny the appeal. >> president: my question, scott is just a simple one. evidently the neighbors had done a substantial addition and remodel themselves. is that closing of the lightwell or the shared -- would that require a variance or an exception? >> no. the project is completely code compliant. >> president: no i'm talking

about the next door neighbor's. >> what they thought i think their building permit was from about 2016 is when they had submitted it. i didn't see any variances or discretionary views or appeals on the scope that they had proposed at that time. >> president: that's right. you were the head honcho at the time. >> i guess i might have been. it doesn't seem they had any issues when their project went through which was a vertical addition. >> president: okay thank you. >> director: okay. we will now hear from the department of building and inspection. >> commissioners joe duffy d.b.i. i've just got real briefly, the building permit it's a site permit and it looks like it's been reviewed and approved properly by the various city agencies. i typically look at these types of permits. plan enforced building and

finally, [inaudible] but we've heard a brief on the points. i think that's all i have to say. thank you. >> director: okay. thank you. so we will now move on to public comment and president honda, the public commentors have 90 seconds. is that right? >> we can't hear you. >> president: i'm looking for my mute button. yes, that's fine. >> director: okay. i did see a hand raised. did someone want to provide public comment. the phone number ending in "5614" please go ahead. with the 818 area code. public comment. go ahead. you might need to -- >> good evening. >> director: thank you. welcome. you have 90 seconds. >> good evening. thank you. i'm a resident of san francisco blocks from 3267 divisadero

street and i'm calling to approve this project. all votes rise with tide. the current property should be improved which ultimately improves all property values in this area. for the entire community continues to benefit from such investment. we should not encourage bad conduct.

>> i know a little bit about making story and through this process he has been inconvenienced and this seems unfair and unjust given this is the only home on the block has not been remodeled and all other homes have gone through major remodels including the home of the very people bringing fourth the appeal and the project has been fully approved by the city with na exceptions and the

project of this kind is the exact thing the city needs right now. people have been leaving for the past year and for a full recovery the city needs residents, projects such as these are essential to the growth and development of a community and obstacles such as this should not be allowed to go forward especially when they hold no merit of basis. i fully sport the project and kindly urge the commissioners to please approve this project and deny this appeal. thank you for your time. >> thank you. we'll hear from lisa condin. ms. condin, are you there? >> caller: hi, my name is lisa condin and i'm born and raised in san francisco and i've known micky and james for a number of years and i have heard about this project. i am very excited for them. i clearly they've worked with

the planning department and i know that they've listened and incorporated a lot of their design modifications and they've reached out to the neighbors and they've really been responsible owners. so i'm hopeful that they will get this approved and this appeal will be denied. >> clerk: thank you. is there any other public comment on this item? ok, if not, we'll move on to rebuttal although there's nothing to rebut the. do you want to take your three minutes to address the board? >> i honestly don't know what else to say. so -- >> clerk: you don't have to take it. >> you can yield time. >> ok. >> mr. sanchez, do you have anything further? >> nothing further to add, thank you. >> ok. and deputy director duffy.

>> nothing to add. thank you. >> thank you. so commissioners, this matter submitted. >> if you don't mind, commissioners, i'll start having it. it's clear the permits were properly issued. the fact that the appellants did not supply a brief and schedule an appeal hearing and they were a member of the courts, is very disappointing and in my idea, it's a misuse of city resources, especially at a time and effort that these resources are actually very valuable. i thank the permit holder for bearing through this process with us. so, i would let commissioner lazarus speak next. >> thank you, i'll reiterate what you just said. i find it with you an abuse of the process and it feels like it's just directly aimed at the

permit holder to delay and add costs. it feels very vindictive and it's one thing not to submit a brief but then not to show up either is pretty disturbing. in my view, there's absolutely nothing that would indicate we should do anything with this appeal other than to deny it. >> commissioner swig. >> i would be glad to make a motion to deny the appeal on the basis the permit was properly issued. >> i believe commissioner chang was going to say something. >> i was just going to add and praise the permit holder for going through the entire process. i was a former planner at the planning department and understand and know how long that process can take and based on mr. sanchez's description,

the permit holder has just again from pre-application review all the way to discretionary review and even to this body now. it's an incredibly long process. that's it. i will definitely let -- >> since rick hogged it we'll let rick make that motion. >> i just want to note, i do see a member of the public has raised their hand. we're no longer allowing public comment. so, we have a motion from commissioner swig to deny the appeal and uphold the permit on the basis that it was properly issued on that motion, commissioner lazarus. >> aye. >> president honda. >> aye. >> commissioner chang. >> aye. >> that motion carries 4-0 and the appeal is denied. and we are moving onto the next

item. this is item number 7. appeal number 21-012 anne hedges versus the planning department approval and subject property a 41 cron crest court on february 8th, 2021 to scott and page olsen of a site permit remodel existing deck with new tile at patio and replace and enlarge existing deck at first floor with stairs to patio below and no deck at second floor with new doors from dinning room. this is permit number 201906183764 and we'll hear from the appellant first. i believe she's represented by mr. mazaconi, hopefully i said your name correctly. >> you said it well, thank you. >> i'm sorry, yes, i'm michael and i represent the appellant anne hedges, who is also present. i'd like to speak for about five minutes and then yield to minutes to anne if poise able. .

i'll try not to reiterate what was in the brief but i would like to responds to some of the points that were raised by the permit holder, mr. olsen and his brief and clear some things up. one of the things that he seemed to suggest in his brief that was that the placement of the planter on the railing was actually a benefit to my client and he says on page 2 and 3 of his brief, this design provides a significant benefit to the a pental because it utilizes the width for the railing to accommodate the planter instead of extending it towards the balance property line. could you pull up exhibit 1? so, what this is, commissioners, this is a blow up of the original design that my client

took d.r. of and what i highlighted in yellow was the properly line between my client and the permit holder and the line that is 3-foot 6 is the distance where the railing was originally for the originally proposed. and the property line. so then, this obviously, because the planning commission took d.r., a revise set of plans was issued and if you could mr. longway go to exhibit 2. thank you. so, this is a blow up of i think what is exhibit 2 to the permit holder's brief. this is detail of the planter and you can see here that the distance now between the end of the planter on my client's property line and the end of the

planter and the distance of the property line is now 3-foot 1 inch. this planter is actually bigger than what was propose and it creates more mass closer to the client's property. now my client took d.r. for several reasons, one of which she was objecting to the scale of the decks and she was looking to have the scale of the decks reduced. what the planning commission sought to do was rather than reduce the scale of the decks, come up with the proposal to put a planter, a sufficient size to house plants for a green wall and the whole purpose of it was that the planter was going to go on the deck and the railing moved to the interior of the planter so that people would be kept from my client's property

line so white deck size won't be reduced, it would create greater privacy for my client and that is simply not what -- it's not what was done by the permit holder. instead, although he agreed at the hearing, at the planning commission d.r. hearing, to put the planter on the deck, he simply changed his mind and ab ra gated his agreement and turned it into a window box, flower box situation. can you please go to exhibit 3. commissioners, this is an e-mail that was sent by a guy name davis stallback, he is a landscape designer.

and what we were trying to do was assist the planning department in evaluating the size of the planter. what would be necessary in order to house plants to grow sufficient size to create a screen. in the opinion of this, this experienced landscape designer, he suggested that a planner be about 22 to 24 inches in hide with 22 to 24-inch to allow for the growth. there was some dispute in the grief about what the sides of the boxes are and i will admit to you in the preliminary statement, i had the size wrong but in the brief, i had the size right and the parties aren't really in disagreement in who what the size of the boxes are. the permit applicant said the boxes are 13 by 16 inches. those are exterior measurements. as we said in our brief, the box is 10 and a half inches wide by

14 inches tall. those are interior measurements and the reason why we provided the interior measurements was to give you all a better concept of how much soil there's going to be. so, what we're trying to explain is that the whole point of of creating the privacy screen was critical to my client's claim for more privacy. it's what commission moore made clear in her statement on the record. she was trying to accomplish. now the planning department simply took the position with me that they were only going to listen to what was -- what the clerk of the commission read into the record and nothing else. i disputed this directly with the planning department and they didn't really want to hear from me. they never really wanted to talk to me at all and the feeling that i frankly got was they were annoyed that i took i applied

for the d.r. and when the d.r. was granted and it went back to them, they just seemed to be annoyed they had to deal with it at all and frankly very early on, i got an e-mail saying, if you don't like it, appeal. so that is why we're here. and we would say to you, and ask you, to simply hold the permit applicant holder to the agreement that he made at planning commission. if i can just have the balance of my time go to ms. hedges. >> yeah, hi, i'm anne hedges. and thank you from your time. i'm not an obstructionist but i feel as if i hit a wall here in the sense that i don't feel that scott olsson is honoring what he agreed to at d.r. i'm an artist -- >> that's time. you can speak in rebuttal if you wish. >> fine. >> you will have time in

rebuttal. we're hear from the permit holders. mr. olsen. >> thank you, good evening executive director and commissioners. my name is scott olsen and my wife paige and i are the permit holder in homeowners here at 41 conques the court where we live with our two daughters. we commence this deck project almost two years ago. quite frankly, because we thought this would be quicker and easier than the more major build outs occurring in our neighborhoods. we believe it's well designed and is modest in scope and has minimal impact on our neighbors. the site permit fully complies with the term set fourth at the d.r. hearing and at the d.r. hearing the commissioners issues a ruling approving the deck project with two minor adjustments as a compromise. the first was moving stairs to the rear of the deck and the

second was providing a planter and i'm going to quote from the ruling, outside the existing railing location for a privacy screen. while the appellant acknowledges the first condition was satisfied, the appellant has a have thed the second has not been satisfied. the site permit that was approved properly pro voids for a permanent, fixed wood planner that will function as an effective privacy screen and is fully consistent with the ruling. the correct dimensions of the planter are contained in the permit drawing which is attached to our brief and provides with a planter of a height of 16 inches. our architect who is here with me today in consultation with the structural engineer, worked

tirelessly with the planning department to come up with the drawings that were consistent with the d.r. and this required a very comprehensive design modification. it's a permanent wood structure built into the width of the railing. it provides a benefit to the appellant because we have maintained the planter more than three feet away from her property. thus avoiding the need for any sort of fire wall and it utilizes and while it does, it utilizes that whole width of the

railing for a planter that can provide a full privacy screening with the plantings. i just want to address this sort of false argument there was anything at the hearing requiring the existing railing to be moved. it's quite honestly not the case if that were to happen, the doors accessing the deck would not be functional and would be unusable rather the d.r., specifically and clearly provided, that the planter would be located quote outside the existing railing location. we do not believe that this appeal process should be utilized to further obstruct our project and you know, impact the

size and function of the deck because that was not what was agreed to we believe the issued site permits and drawings are well designed and fully complied and we ask this appeal be denied and the permit reinstated. i do have my architect, mr. james savoy with me that can talk about the design briefly. >> just a few comments about how the design for the planter was modified from the original scheme that was presented at the d.r. hearing. first of all, the original dough sign actually said all the railings on this were glass so as part of the issue about privacy, the new railing planter design is a solid railing top to bottom basically. the other item i'd just like to

mention briefly that because of the eyes of this planter and the weight of the soil in the planter, i had to consult with our structural engineer he lookd at the weight of this planter and had specific steel brace in place on the steel beam below to anchor the railing itself and if you notice on the drawings on page 89, excuse me, the additional braces hold it up as well. i have done window boxes and planters and even in my own house i know plants can be grown on this size planter that would accommodate the height i've shown. i would be happy to answer any further questions. thank you. >> ok.

>> we will field the rest of our time to mr. sanchez. >> thank you. we will now hear from the planning department. >> thank you, scott sanchez planning department the subject property of 41kronqist court. the purpose of this permit is to add decks to the rear of the subject property and the building permit application was submitted in june of 2019 and it underwent sections 311 notification between the september 18th and october 182,019th during that time one discretionary view was filed by the appellant in this matter and they heard about it on january 30th of 2020. the planning commission voted 4-0. there are three commissioners absent that evening to take discretionary view and to take two actions there with that and to relocate a stair that had been on the common side property

line and relocate that towards the rear of the deck and provide a planter for privacy. this is a dinovo hearing now on the issuance of the building permit and the appellant has raised concerns the planning department did not interpret the planning commission's decision. of course peeing a dinovo bearing the board would have the ability to take whatever action they felt appropriate in this matter whether it's to modify that planter and approve it as is or remove it. so, i think to be clear from the materials submitted by the appellant and including their testimony from the planning commission hearings, and commissioner moore's commentary she was clear that the size of the deck was not getting smaller and the planning commission often hears concerns and issues related to the decks and privacy and when they want to make decks smaller, they're explicit about that and this board typically is.

it would be language, you know, taking an action and setting back the deck to additional distance from the side property line. there was no action such as that in the discretionary view and it was not to make the deck smaller but add it on the outside of the railing. we're left with a question of how big is that plant they're is going on the outside of the deck. we know it's not required to get any smaller, how big does that planter get. and it was noted by the permit holder, the deck is 3 feet 6 inches as proposed and we know if you are within throw feet you are dealing with the fire wall. now the purpose of the planning commission's action and moving the stairs was because of concerns with a fire wall. so, if the planter gets closer than three feet from the side property line, we're having to reintroduce a fire wall, which

we know is not the commission's desire or intent. under the commission, they didn't give a specific width for that planter but we can interpret that as being six inches. if you go any closer than three feet, you are looking at a fire wall which the commission does not want to is not part of the project and they also didn't want the deck to get smaller. what is proposed is something we found to be compliant with the intent of the commission it's a planter that is of a reasonable size such that plants can grow and that and hopeful throw will address some of the privacy concerns that have been raised. we feel it's a very appropriate addition and it's compliant with the planning commission's decision. i'm happy to answer any questions whether it's code compliant and i think no issues have been cited by the

appellant. it comes down to the size of the planter. i'm happy to have questions but we find it it could be co compliant with the commission's decision. >> commissioner swig. >> you just answered and i want to hear it again. my confusion was whether the planning commission was specific in the size, scope and design of the planter and what i'm hearing from you is that it was not specific in the size, scope and scope of the planter and in fact, you, with the permit holders' architect holder themselves, you came to an agreement as to what the planter should be? >> you are correct, sir. >> ok. now you added, you are happy with that planter the way it is

and you have blessed and it's true? that's what i want. >> yes, that's correct. >> thank you. >> thank you. >> president honda. >> only three of the -- three or four of the planning commissioners showed up. >> well, four. you need at least four. three were absent. yeah. >> and so, if that commissioner fung guy was there and the deck passed, that's a good thing. >> i'm assuming because he doesn't miss any hearings so i am assuming commissioner hung was there. >> i was trying to make a funny since we worked with him and he made decks smaller. >> he was there. he was there. >> all right. thank you. >> thank you. we'll hear from the department building inspection. >> commissioners, the permit

under appeal. i didn't hear too much about the building code issues. i do agree with mr. sanchez's comments on the distance for the deck or deck to the property line and the building code. the permit itself appears to have been properly reviewed and issued by the various city agencies that we typically similar to the last project where we had planning forced building and d.p.w. if anyone has any questions, i think that's all the comments that i have. thank you. >> ok. thank you. we will now move on to public comment. is there anyone here who would like to provide public comment on this item. please, raise your hand. ok. i do not see any hands raised. so we'll move on to rebuttal. mr. mozicom. >> i'd like to address this. a number of points.

one thing missing in mr. olsen's response and response of the planning department, is that mrk the planter on the deck and now he claims he can't do it because it would conflict with the door that he wants to use. well, it wouldn't conflict with a sliding door if he put the sliding door in. but there's nothing unclear about what happened in the discussion at the planning commission -- [please stand by]

>> one of the things that also came up at the hearing was the notion that ms. hedges said she did not want opaque glass there. the this design is even worse because now you have plywood all the way down. now she's looking at this huge planter over the side. and the planter is not a

sufficient size to create the green wall. and so my concern is and mr. olsen doesn't dispute it that he agreed to put the planter on the deck. he hasn't addressed it at his brief. nobody in the planning department said anything about the size of the planter being sufficient to house a green screen. with regard to mr. sevoy's comments he talked to an engineer. that's great he talked to an engineer. but he didn't need to talk to an engineer if he simply put the planter on the deck as he said, as the parties agreed. what he needed to do was consult with an arborist or a landscape act tekt or landscape designer to determine whether or not this was sufficient to create the green screen. the planning applicant or holder didn't say they did that.

the only person who submitted any evidence on that point was my client. >> clerk: that's all thank you. >> i would encourage you to grant this appeal. >> director: thank you. we have a question from president honda. >> president: counselor, i've read both the briefs. i would like to ask the applicant to be more comfortable having the planter on the edge of the deck and have the planter outbound than inbound. >> it was pretty clear and if you look at what mr. olson said and he said and i almost quote. let me see if i understand you, you're asking me if i'm willing to have the planter on the deck and then she said, that's right. so it was very clear from the colloquy that both mr. olson understood that the planter was to go on the deck and commissioner moore wanted it on the deck in addition -- >> president: thank you, counselor. >> director: thank you. we will now hear from the permit holder, mr. olson.

>> thank you executive director and thank you, commissioners. i'm going to chalk this up to the no good deed goes unpunished. this compromise of a planter was done instead of a frosted glass privacy screen which we had offered to do and so this was a compromise that reportedly was more acceptable to the appellant, but now they're seeking to question even this. i'm just going to quote from the exact ruling that the planter would be located, quote, outside the existing railing location so quite frankly, i'm going to defer a

rebuttal time to mr. sanchez. >> director: thank you. we will now hear from the planning department. >> scott sanchez with the planning department. this is up to the board to make a decision, you know kind of first, whether or not this structure is even necessary to address privacy issues and, if so, is it adequate to address those privacy concerns. the board doesn't have to be reliant on the planning commission's decision and you have the ability to make modifications to the project. we believe that the planning commission position is properly interpreted and applied in the plans that are before you. we're available for any questions and, yeah, i think that is all that i have to add. thank you. >> director: thank you. we will now hear from the department of building inspection. anything further. >> nothing further. thank you. >> director: okay. thank you. commissioners, this matter's

submitted. >> president: so would any commissioner like to start? don't all jump in at one time. i guess i will. after reviewing both briefs and hearing both permit holder and appellants, i'm in agreeness that the permit holder that the planning commission has given and as the commissioner sanchez has said, i believe that the appeals should be denied on the grounds that the permit was properly issued. with no further comment. that will be my motion. >> director: okay. we have a motion from president honda to deny the appeal and uphold the permit on the basis it was properly issued. on that motion [roll call] so that motion carries 4-0 and the appeal is denied.

so, president honda, are we ready to move on to the next item. >> thank you everyone for your time. >> president: let's take a 5 minute break. >> director: okay. >> president: 5-minute break. >> director: okay. thank you. the appellant in the next matter texted me and i told him his case was next on item 8 and he hand responded yet. >> i'm here. i hear you. >> clerk: there he is. >> i think that was just focused. >> director: okay. january and

discussed a path to resolve the violation through legalizing the uses on the property. there's a building permit submitted in 2019 to effectively do that and other things have come up in the last few months and not much

progress has come up on that. and i say today that he submitted the new materials to staff. it seems like that is going to be back on track. so we're okay with continuing this out two months, hopefully never even needing to come to a hearing, but just, you know, to at least give them time to go through the legalization everies and also to reset the briefing deadline, they didn't submit a brief in the timely manner, but we're okay with letting them submit a brief now. i think they had submitted something in the but, yeah, we're okay with resetting that and giving them time for their brief. >> director: okay. thank you. is there any public comment on this request to continue this matter? if so, raise your hand.

i don't see any public comment, commissioners. so it's a request to continue and to reset the briefing. >> president: unless there's any other comments or questions, i would like to grant that request to extend and have a new date to the specified date with the new briefing scheduled in place and i'd just like to thank both appellants and the city department for working with each other. this was going to be a challenging case. that would be my motion. >> director: okay. so we have a motion from president honda to continue this matter to june 23rd and also to reset the briefing dates, so that would mean in a the appellant's brief would be due june 3rd and we'll e-mail you, mr. keenen with information. june 3rd by 4:30 p.m. and the zoning administrator's brief would be due june 17th. so on that motion, commissioner

lazarus, [roll call] okay. so that motion carries 4-0 and the matter is continued. >> president: good luck, mr. stevens. >> thank you. thank you all. >> director: okay. thank you. >> i love it when things can get resolved. >> director: that was a lot shorter than i thought. >> president: knock on wood please. >> i believe that commences the hearing. >> director: we are officially adjourned. >> night all. >> president: thank you very much. >> director: good night. thank you. mayor l. breed: good

morning, everyone.. breed: good i'm san francisco mayor london breed. i'm here to welcome home our governor gavin newsom to make a very, very special announcement. i do want to start by just really, really, thanking the u.c.s.f. team, all the runners, all the nurses, all the doctors, all the people who have been on this site since january of this year. vaccinating thousands of san franciscans. i want to also thank our disaster service workers, people who work for muni, who

work for different city agencies, the library. they have moved from their current responsibilities to be here on site to help make sure this is a smooth operation. i don't know if any of you have seen, i guess, what they call the pit down there, but for those of you who may not have had a drivers test in many, many years, you may not want to go down there because it's an obstacle course. in any event, today is a good day. yes it's a typical foggy day in san francisco on the west side but it's still a good day. as of today, over 50% of san franciscans over the age of 16 have been vaccinated. yes! [applause] and also, 85% of those over the age of 65 have been vaccinated in san francisco. [applause]

our hospitalization rates are at 20 people. can you believe where we were over a year ago? and where we are now today? with that many people who are vaccinated. who would have thought we would be at that place today? san francisco is currently in the orange tier, and fingers crossed, governor, we will be in the yellow tier next week. and we will be headed home very soon. but guess what, folks? we are still in the pandemic. and we still need to be careful. as you can see, we are still wearing our masks. even though i don't know what anybody else looks like here. but we are keeping each other safe. and as we come out of this pandemic, we are going to look back on this time and be so excited and proud. for what we accomplished here in san francisco and the state and the person who has led this

effort to keep californians safe. to make sure that the hard decisions were made, when other states have seen their numbers sky rocket and still refuse to make those hard decisions. he has beared the brunt of the challenges of this pandemic. no one had a play book written. no one told us we would be dealing with a global pandemic. but our leader, governor gavin newsom has done an extraordinary job helping to move this state forward, and that's the reason why we are in a very good place. so ladies and gentlemen, governor gavin newsom. [applause] >> thank you, madam mayor, very much for the introduction. and thank you for your leadership, dr. colfax, let me just acknowledge that you have been leading the state in terms of your vaccine efforts.

that 80 plus percent for 65 and other. le 50% of folks getting their first dose is substantially higher pace of administered doses than the rest of the state. i want to compliment you, mayor, on your extraordinary job. compliment the partnerships including the partnership with u.c.s.f., community college site. a site the mayor proudly told me has the capacity to administer over 5,000 shots each and every day. the only constraint is manufactured supply. i want to remind everybody we are designing a system here in the state of california that can provide upwards of 5.8 million vaccines to be administered on a weekly basis. currently, we are receiving about two and a half million. but we have designed a system that includes this site here that allows us to more than double that capacity.

in anticipation with expectation that we will be receiving more vaccines, you have noted that everybody now in the state of california, 50 years and up, is now eligible to receive their vaccine. we began that process, established that threshold on april 1st. we are encouraging folks that have not yet signed up to go to "my turn" the state wide platform to learn about the most approximate site for where you are living to get these doses administered. today in the state of california we are proud to have passed two significant milestones. twenty million administered doses in the state of california. and four million administered doses under the more important equity metric. those two milestones, let's put it in perspective, are significant.

we have administered more doses than all but five nations in the world. the state of california that 20 million mark represents over 7 million more doses than any other state in the country. that 4 million on the equity mark, to me, as i noted is more important and significant. this state set a commitment and goal of providing upwards of 40% of all our first doses and providing them under an equity metric, in order to deliver on the cause of equity. we still have a lot of work to do in that space. we are mindful of that. but that four million mark is as important as the 20 million mark. and today we have formally passed that. so what does that mean? it means a number of things. we are seeing death rates, mortality rates go down. we are seeing case rates stabilize.

we had the lowest case rates in the united states of america. over a 7-day period now we have a 1.6% positivity rate state wide. we report today 1,367 cases. still prevalent. still deadly. still a challenge that we need to tackle. and that's why we are mindful, as the mayor said of the imperative and importance of not letting your guard down. not taking off your masks, maintaining your vigilance and accessing once they come up these vaccines. in anticipation and expectation that we do all the above, i will repeat, continuing to wear face coverings, continuing to access vaccines and continue to administer vaccines in an

equitable framework. if we keep the pace, we are moving now beyond the blueprint. we are announcing today that on june 15th, we will be moving beyond the blueprint and we will be getting rid of the colored tiers. we will be moving passed the dimmer switch. we will be getting rid of the blueprint as you know it today. that's on june 15th, if we continue the good work. we anticipate enough vaccines are coming into the state of california, with two and a half million people just last week receiving the vaccine. we anticipate over 30 million people will have been vaccinated at least one dose by the end of the calendar month. with anticipation of doses coming in from the federal government into this month and into may, we can confidently say by june 15th, we can start to open up as business as usual.

subject to ongoing mask wearing and ongoing vigilance. this is a big day in terms of the pandemic and the journey we have been on, as the mayor noted, over the course of the last year. and this is an important milestone today, that 20 million and 4 million equity mark. this is a compliment to all of you. to the mayor, to all the work that's being done by local health officers all up and down the state of california. at the end of the day the vision is realized at the local level. i want to congratulate and applaud all the community partners, the community organizations, all the work being done in a culturally competent manner in every language across state of california, and delivering on the issue of equity. i want to thank the mayor. i want to thank dr. colfax and also dr. galley who led the charge. we had a blueprint in this

state for 31 weeks now. by the way, 16 counties are moving today into less restrictive tiers in that blueprint which is further progress. but no one has been more enthusiastic than moving beyond the blueprint than dr. galley. but soberly, and thoughtfully. led by data, led by disease prevalence, looking day in and day out of hospitalizations and i.c.u.'s, tracking these mutations. and i will close on that point. we are very mindful of the variants and very mindful of mutations. we have sequenced more than any other state the genomic sequencing is second to none. 851 u.k. variants we have sequenced in the state. 10 south african, 35 brazilian variants. close to 9100 west coast variants and we are also tracking a number of different

variants, new one from india which got a little bit of attention this week. this double mutant, double variant and variants from the east coast, including a new york variant. this is really a race, these vaccines against the variants, against the mutations. that's why again i will end as i began, it's incumbent upon all of us, not to announce mission accomplished or put down our guard but that vigilance that got us where we are today, the lowest case rates, positivity rates that is in america. we are seeing bright light at the end of the tunnel. and june 15th, all things being equal we will continue that good work, we will move beyond that blueprint and opening up the economy, business as usual. with that, i am happy to take any questions. and again, just want to thank everybody for all their extraordinary work. >> thank you, governor.

i'm -- >> i'm sorry, over there. >> dar mazerati, question about the coliseum vaccination site. we heard confidence from the president and senator that site could be extended past next week. do you have details today how that might work, particularly the supply of vaccines. >> both sides will remain operational, oakland, rather the alameda site and l.a. at cal state l.a. both are operational, seamless operation. the only changes we won't get the direct allocations of vaccines from the federal government. that's the direct change otherwise no perceptible change in a meaningful way to the public. the issue is constraint. the issue is supply, manufactured supply. we are working with ut county, northern county. working with alameda county and

contra costa county, forming a regional partnership with fema, cal, and matching the allocation with the state allocation of vaccines. we aren't successful of extending beyond the commitment the federal government made. that commitment was the first commitment in the united states, we are very grateful to president biden and vice president harris to their commitment to the state of california. but they made that commitment. they said when that commitment ended, they held to their word and now we will be taking over at least the vaccine supply component and matching it with the counties'. >> thank you for doing this. this is ben christopher with cal matters. you said june 15th, assuming we meet the conditions we will be back to prepandemic business as usual. does that mean schools k-12

june 15th will be required to open back up or maintain pre-pandemic posture? >> i want kids back in person, in school safely for in-person instruction. we made this crystal clear since we put out a proposal in december. and on june 15th, we anticipate there will be no barrier to getting all of our kids safely back. not just k-12. community colleges. including institutions of higher learning. so on june 15th, the answer to your question is yes, affirmatively we expect our kids back in person instruction, to the extent that june 15th calendar is consistent with any ongoing in-person operations at least k-14. >> there's an expectation, not requirement? >> there's an expectation. the legislature will have more to say about the expectation.

but no barrier to having our kids back in-person instruction. that's the expectation. you will be hearing more about our efforts to more firmly and foundationally advance that cause. >> great, thank you. >> hi, governor, fiona with the mercury news. the june 15th news, what standards about hospital rates, thresholds to make that decision? and secondly, will local jurisdictions be able to maintain stricter rules? >> look, at the end of the day, we will be very mindful of these variations, variants and mutations. we are mindful of disease spread. we will be mindful of hospitalizations. we will watch all of the above. making sure we are meeting the equity marks we set forth. by the way we went from two million vaccines 23 days ago to four million under the equity mark. we anticipate conservatively, again, that's just assuming an

old pace. let's do the conservative pace. two and a half million doses last week by the end of this calendar month, north of 30 million people will be vaccinated with at least one dose in the state. or at least will have administered 30 plus million doses. i want to remind everybody, that in california currently, there are about 32 million people that are eligible to receive a dose of vaccine. so we are getting to a point where the vaccine administration, that's just in a month. extrapolate ten weeks out. we are looking ten weeks out. that our expectation the vast majority of people who would want, in fact everybody who wants a vaccine will have had the dose, the second dose, will have the opportunity to see at least a few weeks of those vaccines in people's arms. so the stability and the efficacy of those vaccines will

be at peak. we anticipate the case rates will stabilize. and we anticipate we will not see a significant increase dm hospitalized patients that have received the vaccine. and that's a met -- metric to which we are marking consideration, as it relates to our broader surveillance. dr. galley, i want you to come up, you can talk a little bit more. we have not put precise numerics to that because we are working with the counties. but we broadly are monitoring at least those categories and five total categories, as it relates to that question. >> thanks, governor and mayor, thanks for hosting us and dr. colfax, thank you for all your hard work. indeed, we will be looking at hospitalizations in particular. we are enjoying low hospitalizations across the state.

you heard today 20 patients hospitalized in san francisco with covid. that's a tremendous number in the face of what we have been through over the last year. but we are particularly concerned about not just the hospitalization numbers but also who is being hospitalized. are those who received the vaccines being hospitalized? we are looking internationally on the east coast and midwest, we are seeing many of those hospitalized today with covid, those who have not yet received the vaccine. the governor's point this is a race, between vaccines and variants and additional cases is key. we will keep a close eye not just on that hospitalization rate and number, but understanding who is in the hospital, and whether those who are vaccinated are the ones who are hospitalized. if that is the case and we see a number of people hospitalized who have seen the vaccine, that's a different level of concern. we will be talking about that, like the governor said with our local partners. looking at vaccine supply, we

often talk about accessibility, ability to get a vaccine in a timely way. so looking at what's reasonable to get a vaccine, a couple weeks from people's interest, to being able to get that vaccine appointment will be a key marker we will be watching closely. taking feedback from our county partners, our pharmacy partners, federally qualified health centers to make sure all individual who's are eligible will be vaccinated in a timely way. looking at that approximately 8-week period. a couple weeks to get the vaccine, or the appointment. and about six weeks further down the road to see both shots administered. and then a couple weeks to begin to see peak antibody response so people will have that protection and can move around the state and counties with confidence. >> governor, follow-up on the

oakland coliseum site. with the state allocating and matching that allocation with the counties, ultimately what's the number, what are the numbers going to be like in terms of the number of people getting vaccinated at that site under the fema plan and under the plan with the state and the counties. >> we are working through the details. again, it's determination of what those two counties can put up and we will match same down in southern california, they are operating about 6,000 a day. they have a couple mobile sites, adding 6,000-7,500 a day, baseline about 42,000 a week. remember, this is not a zero sum game. there is increasing supply from pharmacies coming from direct allocations from the federal government. wal-mart, costco, among others last week, part of the pharmacy program. we are also increasing the option of centers. le when these two fema sites

came in, we were living in a different world. mass vaccine sites represent those sites, roughly 3% of the state wide distribution and allocation of vaccines. so we are in a different place. those sites are important, they are up, they are operational, they are turn-key. we want to keep them up, we have been crystal clear with the federal government about that. we tried to get extra doses, we are competing with 50 other states. for what it's worth i talked to other governors who are envious, we have two sites. the first state to get two sites. vast majority haven't seen gotten one site. that's what we are up against with the federal government. they fulfilled that commitment and now working with the counties to figure out what their doses on. on the basis of this, the reason we can't answer that question, the question requires new updated information from the federal government.

this morning we received word that we will get about 16.5 million doses of pfizer and moderna nationwide. and then a variable on the j& j, we are translating what that means for california and contra costa and alameda. we will figure out our match. >> can we expect that number to be lower? >> i wouldn't expect anything until be work through those numbers. >> regarding mask mandates about a third of the states across the country have lifted their mask mandates or never had them in place. when do you anticipate the state of california lifting that mandate? >> we aren't anticipating in the short run lifting the mandate. for masks it's the most important non-pharmacological intervention we could have. i want to remeand people this

disease continues to be deadly, not only in this state but across the country. it didn't take easter weekend off, or spring break week off. it's as deadly as its ever been. the only thing we have done, suppress the spread, mitigated that spread because of the number of vaccines administered because the ant -- antibodies that have significant increase across the state and country and because of mask wearing. we are committed to extinguishing this disease. and we don't have any short-term goals as it relates to lifting the mask mandate. >> hi, governor, stephanie zero with abc7. a couple questions. a follow-up to what you eluded to a moment ago. how many vaccine doses do you anticipate california will receive weekly by early may?

secondly, given indoor venues will be able to open assuming criteria is met, what is the state doing on fake vaccination cards? >> two weeks ago we received 2.8 million, last week 2.1 million, this week 2.4 million. i just referenced, had a call, governor's call, weekly call, runs the task force for the biden administration. they set out the federal allocations. we are translating that. we just got that a couple hours ago. once that information is, once we receive that detailed information, then we present that to the counties. we present that publicly to you in real-time. i anticipate those numbers to continue to go up. the one variable remains, j&j, the stabilization on pfizer and moderna we have more confidence in the short run.

j&j we have confidence in the long run and medium run. it begins to give way to more confidence in may that j&j will come in more supply. the issue of supply, we have confidence the numbers will continue to tier up and by may we will be in that frame that president biden made clear a few months back when he said by may, every eligible american that wishes to access and get a vaccine will have the ability to schedule that access. and i believe that to be the case in may as well. >> hi governor, andreas with telemundo. are you worried about cases going up in places like alameda? >> we are always mindful. first thing we do, we wake up, look at case rates, by region.

the bay area saw a modest increase in the last number of days. state wide, decrease. put that in perspective. new york had over 6,700, a state half our size. florida over 4,700, much smaller. california less than 1,400. we were 2,400 a few days ago, it bounces back and forth. positivity rate remained 1.7%. 1.6% today. 1.7, 1.8 the last few days. so yes, day everyday we are cautious and mindful. everyday people get vaccinated and these cards go through a race to these variants and race to keep the rates at a minimum. >> hi there, how can you ensure people from other states who have lax rules about covid

don't come into california and reintroduce covid into our population when we are moving towards herd immunity. and secondly, once june 15th passes, could the tier system come back afterwards if our rates go back up. >> look, one thing we are mindful of is, you don't know what you don't know. with these mutations, with the variants, with the reality they are experiencing in places like italy, germany, france, the challenges, they are seeing around the rest of the world. increased cases in other states, 16 plus states have seen pretty significant increases in the last few weeks. you got to be open to argument and interested in evidence. there's always the prospect. we will always be led by data, led by reality and experience on the ground. if we aren't vigilant, if we

don't spike the ball and announce mission accomplished, and the good work we have done, july 15th we will be beyond that blueprint and back to normalcy. but importance of masking, particularly indoors. as it comes to people coming from out-of-state, we are aligning efforts with the cdc and recommendations. just last week we made an update to our state guidelines as it relates to travel restrictions. we had a 120 mile restriction. we broadened that state wide. we had specific language updated in that guidance we put out last week as it relates to out-of-state travelers and put up guidelines as it relates to travelers, those seeking to join conventions in this state and requirements around vaccinations and testing. the concern is real. we maintain strict guidelines in that space. and we will continue to monitor

based upon what's actually happening. not what we want to happen, but actually what is truly occurring in real-time. >> hi mayor, megan from the chronicle. come april 15th, will the supply be able to meet the demand for vaccines and will people be able to sign up early before april 15th to get the vaccine? the second question is, i know alameda county previously said they aren't able to take over the coliseum by sunday. will the state be leading the effort or? >> fema -- thank you for the question. i really want to clear this once and for all. the site will continue to operate. fema will continue to provide the support. they have been crystal clear about that for some time. there's just been ambiguity. i'm appreciating the nuance. about one thing, that's supply. direct allocation of supply. we fought hard to get that

supply extended. they couldn't do it. with that in mind, we will figure out the supply. but all the money that they supported that operation and backed the operation with, will continue to flow. all the personnel we need will continue to flow and support that operation. we have augmented our efforts beyond just that site and will continue to increase the total number of available opportunities for people to access these life saving vaccines. as it relates to again, the details, as it relates to supply, we will be forthcoming when we have more clarity. hopefully this afternoon, once we are able to assess that three-week window, in terms of the supply coming in to the state. and forgive me, the first part of your question? >> sure. will residents 16 and older be

able to sign up for the vaccine before april 15. >> yeah, you can go to the "my turn" app. the reason, this is a nuance question. the answer is yes with the my turn. other counties may still be working through old systems but the idea is to get everybody scheduled. let's make this crystal clear, by april 15th, if millions of people try to get a vaccine, it will take some time. it will take a number of weeks, it will extend perhaps over a month until we have the available supply. again, we are still constrained by supply. the eligibility will open up so the opportunity to access will be made available to everybody 16 and over. by the way, we hope to drop that eligibility from 16 down to 12 once the f.d.a. approves the eligibility for 12-16-year-olds. so we will try to mark and

progress in parallel with the cdc. but again, i caution everybody. on april 15th, we don't anticipate a substantial increase in available supply beyond what we are receiving this week. modest, but not substantial. >> hey governor, jeremy white with politico. i think that will be the expectation, the state of the state speech was focused on recovery. there are a lot of ambitious bills, fracking, child care. is there capacity or appetite to take on some of these issues this year, particularly those that could be economically disruptive or something the legislature and your team need to be focused on economic recovery. >> economic recovery to me, is significant, not narrow. i get the broader point.

we haven't backed off on making transformational change. we're not backing away from our efforts with cal aim. a once in a generation opportunity to completely reimagine our substance abuse, behavioral health. we weren't timid. we were quite bold in january. anticipating a modest surplus that's grown substantially. surplus well in excess of 25 billion today. that doesn't even include the 26 plus billion we will be receiving from the federal government from the stimulus. we want to be as bold as the khal -- challenges are big in this state. we will we are mindful a lot of the surplus, not a lot. vast majority is one time in nature. we will maintain our fiscal stance and prudence. we have the highest reserves in state history. we will be paying down more money in potential obligations

than any other time in our state's history. our bond rating is the highest it's been in over two decades. we will continue to do what we can to set aside dollars for a rainy day. but we are mindful that economic recovery has to be focused on equity. and those disproportionately impacted by this pandemic. we will continue as we have in the last number of months to prioritize and target our relief efforts and recovery efforts in that manner. but no, the answer to your question, jeremy, is we are committed to being bold and transformational. but we are also mindful that we cannot oblige or obligate dollars over the long term that we don't have. and so we will continue to also be pragmatic in that respect. >> thank you, governor. i had a quick follow-up on your earlier response about the mask mandate which you said you have

no intention to get rid of in the short-term, the virus being deadly. if we get to the point hospitalizations are low, might you consider flipping the mask mandate? >> we are open to argument. we are interested in data. the disease will make the determination. it won't be political whim, won't be determined outside on the sunny west side of san francisco in the early part of august. this disease continues to be rampant, continues to be deadly. you are seeing disease spikes and surges in other parts of the country, driven by youthful exuberance, literally and figuratively as well as these variants. all these things are factors including the lived experience around the rest of the world. we are very sober about all this, we don't subscribe to the point of view as some of the other states. there are few, you know, baseball fans i take a back

seat to. i was disappointed to see some of those images, tens of thousands of strangers packed into a stadium without any mask mandate on opening day the other day or yesterday. one of those states. that's not the lead we are going to follow in the state of california. we will follow the lead of dr. galley and colfax and others and continue to be sober and mindful of this disease and this pandemic. >> last question. hi governor, this is -- >> by the way, the mayor is still here. she is always available for any questions. >> forgive me, mayor. >> god bless you. >> hi governor, this is -- just one question. because people who over the age of 16 can be injected since april 15th, can you talk about support we have seen from the federal government? >> for people over 16. support from the federal

government that's come for them? >> can you talk to support we receive from federal government. >> the broader support specific to the vaccines? >> yeah. >> well, i mean, the support we are receiving from the federal government is extraordinary. i just want to note that it's come in many different ways. we are getting direct support for these two mask vaccination sites that will continue in the state of california, both in alameda and l.a. that support will continue in terms of personnel and reimbursements in partnership with fee -- fema and office of emergency services. the counties, l.a., contra costa and alameda county. direct financial support for direct vaccines. again, i will remind people, you can get a vaccine

regardless of your immigration status. your ability to pay. vaccines are free. i want to encourage everybody 50 and over today to get a vaccine. on april 15th, everybody 16 and over will be eligible for a vaccine. we are in a race against these variants and i want to encourage everybody who hasn't availed themselves to do so. the sooner we do that we truly can turn the page, move away from this blueprint by june 15th. continue to do what you have done to get us where we are today. among the lowest positivity rates in the country. i'm mindful always of these mutations. i want to again thank dr. gally and colfax and mayor breed for extraordinary leadership. thank you to the partnerships at u.c.s.f., community college and one of the larger vaccination sites, not only in san francisco but northern california. we appreciate everybody being out here today. thank you.

>> the hon. london breed: good morning, everyone. let's get right to it. this is not unfamiliar territory for us. many of you remember, when i started at supervisor for district 5, 4-20, although it has been a tradition in san francisco for many, many years, there was one year in particular that was a little different than most years. we saw thousands of people come from all over the bay area to robin williams meadows to celebrate this unsanctioned

holiday, alex, is that what we want to call it, right here in golden gate park? and i think when i was supervisor, i think that was the most complaints that i got from constituents after it was over, the conditions of the park. as much as we want to celebrate here in san francisco, and as supportive as the city has been to continue to see the tradition occur, it has been really challenging, of course, to gather in large groups during covid. now last year, what i really appreciate about people who come here year after year, is we asked you not to, and you followed our health guidance. you followed the health orders and you stayed away from golden gate park and prevented that from being a super spreader in our city, and we thank you for

that. now i know that man of you thought we -- many of you thought we would be celebrating and that we would be in a better place. we are in a better place. we've seen the case numbers go down in san francisco. we've seen the hospitalization numbers go down in san francisco, and we've vaccinated at least 50% of san franciscans with the first dose of the vaccine, but we are not there yet, we are not at a place where we can have large number events, so what does that mean? that means this year's 4-20 celebration are cancelled. robin williams meadows will be fenced off and unavailable for access to any member of the public. it means we will be patrolling the area and on the lookout for

mass events in our city. because the bigger issue for us is, the issue we don't want to see, is san francisco to go backwards. we only need to look at what's around a number of variants in the united states and what's happening in michigan. as much as we are tired about the virus and as much as we are excited about reopening, we are still not at a place where we can have large scale events, large gatherings of people. we don't want to go backwards. yesterday, i went to brett hart elementary school in the bayview-hunters point community. i can't tell you how excited i was for those children who were going back into the classroom finally. when i had lunch at a thai restaurant in the soma area, the owner asked, mayor, when

are we going to bring businesses back? my business is suffering. people are still struggling. we are not completely 100% open, but we are in a decent place. in fact, we expected to have more news about going into the yellow sooner rather than later, and we have not gotten that news. so the point is, as grateful as we are as to where we are as a city, and how we have kept the infection rates down, how we are one of the densest cities in the country with one of the lowest death rates anywhere, as grateful as we are with where san francisco is, we're still not where we need to be, and so i'm asking members of the public who were making plans, which we know were happening on-line, on social media, we're making plans to go to -- media,

were making plans to go to san francisco on 4-20, unfortunately, we will not be able to provide the space or the support for large scale events anywhere in our city. we need everyone to celebrate at home, responsibly, with your mask, in limits numbers in whatever way, shape, or form, and be patient with us because as we begin to reopen, we can look back and be proud of the sacrifices that we made here in san francisco to get us to this point. so i just want to -- we have a number of folks here to speak to talk specifically about what's going to happen so you can know, that even if you want to come any way, it's going to be virtually impossible for you to get to the location that you're trying to get to because it will be fenced out -- fenced off, it will be patrolled, and unfortunately, we will not be able to allow it this year.

and with that, i want to introduce dr. grant colfax about where we are, and phil ginsburg, and a number of other speakers, and we're happy to answer questions after everyone's had an opportunity to speak. thank you so much. >> good morning, everybody, and thank you, madam mayor, for the introduction and your tremendous leadership during this unprecedented time. i'd also like to thank director ginsburg in the rec and park department for inviting me to be here for this important event. i'm here today to applaud the people of san francisco for the sacrifices that you have made and for following our health guidelines throughout this pandemic. your hard work and commitment has helped us beat back three surges, including our winter surge, and we continue to move forward with reopening.

but i'm also here with words of caution. i am, we are watching with concern about what's happening in the -- in the mid western part of the country, including and especially in michigan, as well as in other parts of the world, including europe, and just yesterday, the director of the c.d.c., recommended that michigan go into another lockdown to bring its surge under control. i think we can all agree that's certainly the last thing that we want to see here in the state and in san francisco. i think we need to take the possibility of a fourth surge seriously, and gatherings like the 4-20 events we've seen in previous years could set us back. i applaud the efforts that organizers have done in cancelling the event. thank you. and i encourage everyone who looks forward to this annual

event, if they choose to do so, to enjoy this day from home. we are making great progress on vaccinations. we are now vaccinating in san francisco over 12,000 people a day, but we are still not at that point where we can let our guard down. we still need to do, in addition to the vaccines that we know can slow the spread of the virus, masking, social distancing, avoiding nonessential travel and limiting gatherings with people outside of your household. we will be introducing this week what we call the enhanced orange tier. but i want to remind people that outdoor gatherings are limited to 25 people with same households with masking and social distancing. starting on the 15th, outdoor

gatherings with increase to 50 people with masking and social distancing with no household restriction, and with food served, that restriction drops to 25 people. so that is progress, and i know we are all eager to make even further progress and to put this chapter of limitations behind us, but let's continue to take the precautions necessary for now. finally, i also have to mention that if you are going to purchase cannabis, we encourage you to procure your gear from licensed businesses and not from the street. cannabis from licensed retailers is tested and safe for consumption. and again, i want to thank all san franciscans for your on going support during this challenging time. when it's your turn, get vaccinated, do the right thing, and let's get through this pandemic together. thank you.

>> the hon. london breed: thank you, dr. colfax. now, i want to introduce the new captain for park station, captain padrini -- am i saying your name right? all right. captain padrini. >> thank you, mayor breed, dr. colfax, director ginsburg, and [inaudible] my name is [inaudible] padrini, and i'm the captain of park station. we know that 4-20 is an event that has been held here in the park for a long time, and many look forward to celebrating. unfortunately, we won't be celebrating this year. san francisco has come so far in response to the covid-19

pandemic, and we just can't afford to let our guard down now. as you heard others mention already, the area of golden gate park where all have gathered to celebrate 4-20 day, that area will be closed. the city will be erecting and installing fencing and barriers to limit and control access. san francisco police officers, working with our partners, park rangers and parking patrol officers, will prevent access to these areas and keep traffic moving. we are prepared to do enforcement if necessary, but we're asking for your cooperation by celebrating safely at home or in your neighborhood. so again, please celebrate virtually this year so that, hopefully, all can celebrate in person next year. thank you. >> the hon. london breed: thank you, captain.

you're, like, the third captain that we've worked with at park police station to deal with some of the challenges at 4-20, and the third one to say you look forward to it, as well. so with that, i want to introduce the director of the rec and park department, phil ginsburg. >> thank you, mayor. i want to thank the mayor, our health director and d.p.h., the office of cannabis, all our partners here in this effort to continue to keep our parks joyous and safe. it's been a long year for us all, but our parks all over the city have been places where we've been able to pursue our physical and mental health. we're almost there, but we're just not ready to party. so as the mayor alluded, and as captain padrini alluded, there will be no party here at hippie

hill in robin williams meadow on 4-20. officers will be disbursed, making sure there are no large crowds. consider me director buzzkill. getting outside is fine, right? 4-20 is a holiday. celebrate it, but getting outdoors is not. you can celebrate in your household by live streaming 420hippiehill.com. our goal here is to maintain

our treasured open spaces as places where we can, again, pursue physical and mental health. we welcome people to enjoy their parks. get out and enjoy a park. in san francisco, we have 225 of them. all of us live within ten minutes of a park, and if you're coming from someplace else, there are amazing parks and open spaces all over the bay area, the peninsula, and marin. use them. thank you. >> the hon. london breed: thank you, phil. but when you go to the park, make sure you know you cannot gather in groups larger than 25 with a maximum of three households, so we will be enforcing the health order throughout san francisco. enjoy our parks but follow the rules. and as i mentioned to you before, this event initially

has grown into something that none of us could ever have imagined, like the pandemic. the fact is because we're san francisco, we didn't just shut our doors and say, it's not going to happen. we're going to end it, we decided to figure out what was the most effective way to make it safe, what was the most effective way to recover our expenses in terms of our cost. how were we going to make it the kind of event that you can celebrate, enjoy san francisco like many other events that occur here. we put our heads together, phil ginsburg and i and others, and fortunately, we have identified a native san franciscan who said -- we didn't go to him, he came to us. he said he wants to make it safe, he wants to work together. he owns a business on haight street, born and raised in the city, and really wanted to

support this gathering, and as a result, put together a number of sponsors and entertainment and a number of resources to cover expenses related to transportation and things that are necessary to make this event happen, and we created an amazing partnership. and i think since this partnership has started, alex, you were only able to do one so far? is it two? so at this time, i want to introduce alex aquino who is really -- three? three? we've known about three traditionally in the city. technically, you're not supposed to smoke in the park, but we're trying to understand and be open-minded about this. we get it, and we have worked with alex over the past couple of years, and i want to introduce him now to say a few

words. >> and good morning, everybody. is it still morning? good afternoon. thank you, mayor breed, director ginsburg, for having me this afternoon. it's best for our public and public safety and health. we encourage people not to gather. instead, take advantage of some of the great live streams that we're producing this year in the safety and comfort of your own home. we have a great show lined up this year by burner, hosted by michael blackson, paul rodriguez, and bob saget. we are working with weedmaps for a free live stream, hosted

by snoop dogg, rocky, and more. these will be benefiting local businesses and local entities. so please go to 420hippiehill.com. >> the hon. london breed: thank you, alex, and thank you so much for putting together an alternative where people can still enjoy 4-20. a lot of folks we know this year and this past year have had to do virtual events. many people have adapted, and 4-20, no different, and fingers crossed, you'll all be able to return and enjoy golden gate park next year. i also want to recognize the director of the office of cannabis for the city and county of san francisco, marissa rodriguez.

thank you for being here today, and at this point, happy to answer any questions that you may have. [inaudible] >> the hon. london breed: yeah. i definitely was saddened and disappointed and concerns when i heard about the johnson & johnson vaccine being removed, but unfortunately, we've had this challenge before. we know with a separate vaccine not related to covid, the pfizer vaccine, they talked about that, and my hope is that not a lot of people were impacted, and we're going to continue to do vaccines. we have other vaccines which have not been problematic.

i have not had any symptoms or have experienced any clots related to the johnson & johnson vaccine. of course, i'm disappointed because it's a one-and-done vaccine that we all have encouraged other people to get. what we don't want people to do is to be discouraged from getting vaccines period. if i had to do it all over again, i'd still get the vaccine, and in light of the new information, probably would choose another option. those options have been in circulation and available to people even before the johnson & johnson was available. so i would say to those people who have received the johnson & johnson, to definitely contact your primary health care provider or reach out to the place where you have received the vaccine, like a number of the community places we have available. this is a set back, but it's not going to stop san francisco from moving forward and doing everything we can to provide vaccines to the public.

[inaudible] >> the hon. london breed: so what was asked was about the new sobering center i announced today. let's just back up, because this goes back to even when i was on the board of supervisors and my support for safe injection sites. now, we know that people struggle with addictions in various capacities, whether it's drugs, alcohol, gambling, there are a number of addictions that people face, and just because we don't want to see them doesn't mean they're just going to go away, so we can't keep doing things the same way we've done them and expect to get a different result. we have some amazing programs like delancey street and

healthright 360, but people using drugs that create psychosis can sometimes do permanent damage to folks who may not necessarily be able to say, i need help, and we see that playing out on our streets every single day. so what was important for me is to not let it play out on the streets, so get people in a safe, clean environment with health care professionals who understand people working with addiction, and hopefully, those people are able to get the help and the support that they need. and i will also say that as much as we want to see people get help, we all -- i mean, i have had family members that have struggled with addiction. we all know that until someone says i need help, it's a whole different process to getting

them help. so hopefully, these sobering centers and safe injection sites for people will help prevent overdosing, will help present an option into treatment or some form of support, because we want to make sure it's easier to access help than it is to access drugs and alcohol on our streets, and that's what this sobering center is about. [inaudible] >> the hon. london breed: do we have that information or do we need to get back -- [inaudible] >> the hon. london breed: okay. i think we need to get back to you on the data because we haven't received the latest numbers from the controller's office as to the financial

impacts on the city's resources, but you know that we provided equity grants for many of our equity applicants, people who were disproportionately impacted by the war on drugs, and making sure that they have opportunities to have capital to open up these businesses, but we do know, sure, that cannabis and a number of other businesses have thrived as a result of this pandemic, and we'll have more data probably at another time. [inaudible] >> the hon. london breed: i'm going to let dr. grant colfax answer that question.

>> good morning again. so right now, we have the capacity to put over 20,000 vaccines in arms. we're doing an average of 12,000 because of the lack of supplies. i think the johnson & johnson, we're following the f.d.a.s and c.d.c.s lead on that and putting a pause on johnson & johnson, but because of the decrease in supplies that the state announced this week, we're getting a third less vaccine. this week, we've only gotten 500 doses of johnson & johnson. we'll put those on pause, but we don't anticipate disruption in the scheduled appointments, and we'll continue to follow the situation closely. [inaudible] >> no cancellation will be as a result of this. we have very small part of johnson & johnson, so we're continuing to focus on getting the vaccines into arms that we do have, the vast majority of

which are moderna and pfizer. >> the hon. london breed: all right. thank you. thank you. >> it was an outdoor stadium for track and field, motorcycle and auto and rugby and cricket located in golden gate park, home to professional football, lacross and soccer. adjacent to the indoor arena. built in the 1920s. the san francisco park commission accepted a $100,000 gift from the estate to build a

memorial in honor of pioneers in the area. the city and county of san francisco contributed an additional $200,000 and the stadium was built in a year. in the 1930s it was home to several colleges such as usf, santa clara and st. mary's for competition and sporting. in 1946 it became home to the san francisco 49ers where they played nearly 25 years. the stayed de yam sat 60,000 fans. many caught game the rooftops and houses. the niners played the last game against the dallas cowboys january 3, 1971 before moving to candlestick park. the stadium hosted other events before demolition in 1989. it suffered damages from the earthquake. it was reconstructed to seat 10,000 fans with an all weather track, soccer field and

scoreboards. it hosts many northern california football championship games. local high schools sacred heart and mission high school used the field for home games. the rivalry football games are sometimes played here. today it is a huge free standing element, similar to the original featuring tall pink columns at the entrance. the field is surrounded by the track and used by high school and college football and soccer. it is open for public use as well. [♪♪♪] >> i just don't know that you

can find a neighborhood in the city where you can hear music stands and take a ride on the low rider down the street. it is an experience that you can't have anywhere else in san francisco. [♪♪♪] [♪♪♪] >> district nine is a in the southeast portion of the city. we have four neighborhoods that i represent. st. mary's park has a completely unique architecture. very distinct feel, and it is a very close to holly park which is another beautiful park in san francisco. the bernal heights district is unique in that we have the hell which has one of the best views in all of san francisco. there is a swinging hanging from a tree at the top. it is as if you are swinging

over the entire city. there are two unique aspects. it is considered the fourth chinatown in san francisco. sixty% of the residents are of chinese ancestry. the second unique, and fun aspect about this area is it is the garden district. there is a lot of urban agriculture and it was where the city grew the majority of the flowers. not only for san francisco but for the region. and of course, it is the location in mclaren park which is the city's second biggest park after golden gate. many people don't know the neighborhood in the first place if they haven't been there. we call it the best neighborhood nobody has ever heard our. every neighborhood in district nine has a very special aspect. where we are right now is the mission district. the mission district is a very special part of our city. you smell the tacos at the [speaking spanish] and they have

the best latin pastries. they have these shortbread cookies with caramel in the middle. and then you walk further down and you have sunrise café. it is a place that you come for the incredible food, but also to learn about what is happening in the neighborhood and how you can help and support your community. >> twenty-fourth street is the birthplace of the movement. we have over 620 murals. it is the largest outdoor public gallery in the country and possibly the world. >> you can find so much political engagement park next to so much incredible art. it's another reason why we think this is a cultural district that we must preserve. [♪♪♪] >> it was formed in 2014. we had been an organization that had been around for over 20 years. we worked a lot in the neighborhood around life issues. most recently, in 2012, there

were issues around gentrification in the neighborhood. so the idea of forming the cultural district was to help preserve the history and the culture that is in this neighborhood for the future of families and generations. >> in the past decade, 8,000 latino residents in the mission district have been displaced from their community. we all know that the rising cost of living in san francisco has led to many people being displaced. lower and middle income all over the city. because it there is richness in this neighborhood that i also mentioned the fact it is flat and so accessible by trip public transportation, has, has made it very popular. >> it's a struggle for us right now, you know, when you get a lot of development coming to an area, a lot of new people coming to the area with different sets of values and different culture. there is a lot of struggle between the existing community and the newness coming in.

there are some things that we do to try to slow it down so it doesn't completely erase the communities. we try to have developments that is more in tune with the community and more equitable development in the area. >> you need to meet with and gain the support and find out the needs of the neighborhoods. the people on the businesses that came before you. you need to dialogue and show respect. and then figure out how to bring in the new, without displacing the old. [♪♪♪] >> i hope we can reset a lot of the mission that we have lost in the last 20 years. so we will be bringing in a lot of folks into the neighborhoods pick when we do that, there is a demand or, you know, certain types of services that pertain more to the local community and working-class. >> back in the day, we looked at mission street, and now it does not look and feel anything like mission street.

this is the last stand of the latino concentrated arts, culture and cuisine and people. we created a cultural district to do our best to conserve that feeling. that is what makes our city so cosmopolitan and diverse and makes us the envy of the world. we have these unique neighborhoods with so much cultural presence and learnings, that we want to preserve. [♪♪♪]

>> i try to start every day not looking at my phone by doing something that is grounding. that is usually meditation. i have a gym set up in my garage, and that is usually breathing and movement and putting my mind towards something else. surfing is my absolute favorite thing to do. it is the most cleansing thing that i'm able to do. i live near the beach, so whenever i can get out, i do. unfortunately, surfing isn't a daily practice for me, but i've been able to get out weekly, and it's something that i've been incredibly grateful for. [♪♪♪] >> i started working for the

city in 2005. at the time, my kids were pretty young but i think had started school. i was offered a temporarily position as an analyst to work on some of the programs that were funded through homeland security. i ultimately spent almost five years at the health department coordinating emergency programs. it was something that i really enjoyed and turned out i was pretty good at. thinking about glass ceiling, some of that is really related to being a mother and self-supposed in some ways that i did not feel that i could allow myself to pursue responsibility; that i accepted treading water in my career when my kids were young. and as they got older, i felt more comfortable, i suppose, moving forward. in my career, i have been asked to step forward. i wish that i had earlier

stepped forward myself, and i feel really strongly, like i am 100% the right person for this job. i cannot imagine a harder time to be in this role. i'm humbled and privileged but also very confident. so here at moscone center, this is the covid command center, or the c.c.c. here is what we calledun -- call unified command. this is where we have physically been since march, and then, in july, we developed this unified structure. so it's the department of emergency management, the department of public health, and our human services hughesing partners, so primarily the department of homelessness and supportive housing and human services agency. so it's sort of a three-headed

command in which we are coordinating and operating everything related to covid response. and now, of course, in this final phase, it's mass vaccination. the first year was before the pandemic was extremely busy. the fires, obviously, that both we were able to provide mutual support but also the impact of air quality. we had, in 2018, the worst air quality ten or 11 days here in the city. i'm sure you all remember it, and then, finally, the day the sun didn't come out in san francisco, which was in october. the orange skies, it felt apocalyptic, super scary for people. you know, all of those things, people depend on government to say what's happening. are we safe? what do i do?

and that's a lot of what department of emergency management's role is. public service is truly that. it is such an incredible and effective way that we can make change for the most vulnerable. i spend a lot of my day in problem solving mode, so there's a lot of conversations with people making connections, identifying gaps in resources or whatever it might be, and trying to adjust that. the pace of the pandemic has been nonstop for 11 months. it is unrelenting, long days, more than what we're used to, most of us. honestly, i'm not sure how we're getting through it. this is beyond what any of us ever expected to experience in our lifetime. what we discover is how strong we are, and really, the depth of our resilience, and i say

that for every single city employee that has been working around the clock for the last 11 months, and i also speak about myself. every day, i have to sort of have that moment of, like, okay, i'm really tired, i'm weary, but we've got to keep going. it is, i would say, the biggest challenge that i have had personally and professionally to be the best mom that i can be but also the best public certify chant in whatever role i'm in. i just wish that i, as my younger self, could have had someone tell me you can give it and to give a little more nudge. so indirectly, people have helped me because they have seen something in me that i did not see in myself.

there's clear data that women have lost their jobs and their income because they had to take care of their safety nets. all of those things that we depend on, schools and daycare and sharing, you know, being together with other kids isn't available. i've often thought oh, if my kids were younger, i couldn't do this job, but that's unacceptable. a person that's younger than me that has three children, we want them in leadership positions, so it shouldn't be limiting. women need to assume that they're more capable than they think they are. men will go for a job whether they're qualified or not. we tend to want to be 110% qualified before we tend to step forward. i think we need to be a little more brave, a little more exploratory in stepping up for positions. the other thing is, when given an opportunity, really think

twice before you put in front of you the reasons why you should not take that leadership position. we all need to step up so that we can show the person behind us that it's doable and so that we have the power to make the changes for other women that is going to make the possibility for their paths easier than ours. other women see me in it, and i hope that they see me, and they understand, like, if i can do it, they can do it because the higher you get, the more leadership you have, and power. the more power and leadership we have that we can put out

>> we broke ground in december of last year. we broke ground the day after sandy hook connecticut and had a moment of silence here. it's really great to see the silence that we experienced then and we've experienced over the years in this playground is now filled with these voices. >> 321, okay. [ applause ] >> the park was kind of bleak. it was scary and over grown. we started to help maclaren park when we found there wasn't any money in the bond for this park maclaren. we spent time for funding. it was expensive to raise money for

this and there were a lot of delays. a lot of it was just the mural, the sprinklers and we didn't have any grass. it was that bad. we worked on sprinkler heads and grass and we fixed everything. we worked hard collecting everything. we had about 400 group members. every a little bit helped and now the park is busy all week. there is people with kids using the park and using strollers and now it's safer by utilizing it. >> maclaren park being the largest second park one of the best kept secrets. what's exciting about this activation in particular is that it's the first of many. it's also representation of our city coming together but not only on the bureaucratic side of things. but also our neighbors, neighbors helped

this happen. we are thrilled that today we are seeing the fruition of all that work in this city's open space. >> when we got involved with this park there was a broken swing set and half of -- for me, one thing i really like to point out to other groups is that when you are competing for funding in a hole on the ground, you need to articulate what you need for your park. i always point as this sight as a model for other communities. >> i hope we continue to work on the other empty pits that are here. there are still a lot of areas that need help at maclaren park. we hope grants and money will be available to continue to improve this park to make it shine. it's a

really hidden jewel. a lot of people don't know it's here. . >> clerk: okay. good afternoon and welcome to the san francisco planning commission remote hearing for thursday, april 15, 2021. on february 25, 2020, the mayor declared a local state of emergency related to covid-19, and on april 3, 2020, the planning commission received authorization from the mayor's office to reconvene remotely to the end of the shelter