wednesday aug 21. 2024 regular meeting of abatement appeal's board. first item is roll call. period chavhere. >> commissioner alexander-tut. >> commissioner shaddix. >> here. >> commissioner here >> commissioner williams. >> here. >> eng and nuemann are excused. and next we our land acknowledgment.

the abatement appeal's board [ramaytush ohlone acknowledgment] >> thank and next members of the public listen n comment call in number is 263248361.01 the code is >> and our next we'll have the .oa all parties giving testimony

today stand and raise your right hand. >> do you swear testimony you are aboutothe truth to the best of your knowledge? >> thank you, you may be seated. >> and also wanted to just read for everyone's affmation the way the proceedings will take place. is that the department of present its c appellate, next public comment 3 minutes to peek and last rebuttal time of appellate. the next item is b. minutes. approval of minutes discussion and possible action to adopt the for a special meeting on july regular meeting j 17th, 2024. is well a motion to approve the

minutes? >> so >> second. >> so there is a motion and a second comment on the m seeing none, our commissioner in favor? >> aye. >> opposed? >> the minutes are approved. >> good morning i have one piece of before we start. the appellates for 6927 and 28 for 1920 quint street with drawn the appeals and not hear them today. thank you. anyoor comment near item. ntinued appeal order of

abatement.se 6925200 ash avenue. and the action requested by appellate is appellate appeals the april 12, 2023 order of abatement and assessment of cos. appellate requests the board to rescind and reverse tnoe. notice of violation and order of abatement. appellate stated removal of blight was complete prior to the nov. and would staff likeove forward?

>> good morning to everyone and building inspection commission i'm [inaudible] senior building in to represent the department of building inspection for presenting the aab appeal case on today agenda. mber 6925 the address is 201 ashton avenue. this subject property consisting one story building in 5b construction for a single house in [inaudible] in september 201a [inaudible] at the premesis in responds to the public complaint and reviewd that unauthorized new f erected

surrounding the sizef th premesis at the corner lot of the block. al fences were visible from the streecht in height ranging 4 6 feet. at the back of the sidewalk and within the right-of-way. unauthorized fences multiple violations against code.rosshe planning, public work, puc to dbi. owner has taken no action to comply with and over over 5 years dbitime rendzer a decision to issue order of abatement on of 2023. 7 years ago the public owner file a building permit. 09d23. attempt to legalize the

fence. however thshg pert been approved by dbi due to the and fail to obtain approval f encroachment permit. the owner follow an appeal with the board in december ofasf rel. currently the property owner is required revise theirert drawing and incorporate t condition and requirement out line in public worksun 13 of 24. with modification as detedn the order. staff recommendation, uphold the order of abant including imposing the assessment of cost due site document of violation after a phyite inspection in september 2017.

property owner replace the fence in noncompliancegh the front of the premesis in the right-of-way without an approval the building permit. city planning and public w approval. today, 7 years after the first nov the owner not obtained the permit and complete the corrected w to legalize the unauthorized fence. reverse b to the last legal condition. hence, the order of abatement wassopately back in april of 23. thank you. aftys could i hand out a hard .p

copy of the deck to the board? i think we don a motion? no. that's fine. >> yea. >> thank you. for the whole board. should be extra copies. >> okay.

>> n2017 repaired a blighted fence on the property following blight removal is man datd by public works, housing and building code. sidewalk light to enhance safety ublic works code. the style of the fence. [speak fast]. the visibilityor pillars in alignment with planning code. 2017 there was a complaint the reds dent has been dog and playing loud music from 10 a.m. to 7 p.m. i would like to "volume lowered i it in my impeachment all

day this issafe property by state and federal law. dbi a search private property without probable proper consent and due process violating our rights. >> dbi issued violation an investigation revealed new fence on the co whout the benefit of a perimism san francisco co at the time notice of violation is issued the direct take paragraphs of the property and make copies them available. san francisco building code when the buildinger inspection this properties are written notice to the owner that properties are unsafe. shall specify the conscience. iolation notice violates our rights. dbi violation notice does notir

process right to appeal the ]w notice. san francisco code legislates a 15 days to request a hearing and set the prefer for requesting a hearing. ca constitutions require a person not depri of life, liberty or process witho due process of law. disregards the law violating our rights. >> october 11, 2017 filed the permit application. ity mandated a variance hearing due to the h of the fence without the legal requirement that the action makes the property our variance was approve in the 2019 andron the 2021ful on november 24 of21dpw alleged our private

easement needs legislation and . suitted a minor sidewalk we encroachment permit. on far of 22, dpw nce height, despite a rarns leg fence for 3 foot around the street light. obtain a general excavation permit to remove the luther laand permits to r the gas fire table despite 2015 permit legalizing the gas fire table and no code violation. >> on december 23 [inaudible] despite absence of encroachment myth could not be finalized this abatement was

in responsibles to the appeal dbi now claims for first time violation the fence the public right of way under mining the safe path of travel which is a mistake dbi defense law says that public and private rights ways are different. public ways are termed highways or public roads and situateery . private way is the ease a person or description has right developed from the general map ratifies the right of an as a private easement. the 1922 bilaws reserve the private right-of-way easement for street light pole access.fo the ease am for puc access and

the historic map confirmed the right of am throughout the neighborhood is for puc access to water pipeindividual evidence proves the private easement is private property. dbi clas private easement is a city ownedunpaid sidewalk violate sidewalk code. code require surfaces to be firm and made of concrete, tile, exposed concrete or other sidewalk paving material. dbi claim of city owned unpaved sidewalk is a mistake of fact aw >> this hearing is about violations and abatement from 23, conducts unlawful searches of private propertiful july 8 o search for evidence of nonexistent property crime proves there was n

of unsafe property.property wit or due process protections violate our rights. because the jurisdiction of the or overruling dbi a dbi searchs and violation noticesaw vio outside of the board's jurisdiction, we request this boardo remand the case to the superior courtety jo rescind the unlawful notices acknowledging errors and searching private property and violation noise void of property. thank you. thank you. is there public comment on this item?

any remotely? no. there is no public comment. there is staff rebuttal? stot departmentdbi [inaudible] the owner appellate is required to obtainermit for fence in front of the premise premesis or in fact the owner failed to obtain permit repair.

we. we are working on it. just a moment. we have in the staff report the package let's look the exhibit b. that's the existing felonies. it is typical of that extend from the permit or city planning ovhi is like with the

open slot. and heigh in front of the property. however, if you reveal common b on the bottom photo, the capture in 2017 e rektedencg dbi permit that fence is bey 3. which beyond the requirement that extend from thepermit. the appellate have this actioni permit constitute aviation. okay. and currently they have notttin approval to encroaching t public right-of-way is defending ther to comply with violation. so. that's it. >> okay. thank you. des the appellate have

rebuttal? no. >> thank you. and the board deliberation. before we get want to make sure we are understanding whatn@" and jurisdiction of the are. board today is. we are looking specifically at whether or not there was a rmit for this work? that's what the notice of violation was. there this is unpermitted building? i'm asking who can answer? >> that's correct. notice of violation thetht a pe there is still no permit as of today. you are determining whether the abatement was issued properly. >> thank you. >> thank you. commissioneralexander-tut. to upon follow up i want to ask

what we are not hearing today. i will ask the negative if youm. there is the appellate brought upnow issue of no notification this is we are there is not challenge of jurisdiction we are hearing the case, correct? yes. that's it. so and then the question of the easement before us today is that co that is correct. >> ■[ou and the question about the access to t seet light is not before us today. >> correct >> we are talking about the permit for the fence. was it issued properly >> thessue you mentioned may come up at the approvalss but those questions are not before us today? >> that's correct. >> thank you.

>> i have no furtherquestions. commissioner sommer. i know one does not need a permit to install a fence up to certain heights i looked it told meallythat requirement. fence 3 feet or less ot in front of a property. says the planning's information sheet on e >> yes. >> i understand that we a variance and now up to 4 feet in height. >> right if youead the violation legalize it as is or reduce it to 3 feet. permit uld not have needed a >> and a variance up to allow it to extend u to 4 feet? >> the permit staff?

>> planning department variance. >> they are wking on it. however we need to the novsued year is accurate they did not get the permit to upgradehe violation. >> i see what you are saying. it is over thenl would not need a permit under 3 feet on the property. under 3 feet it was over 3 feet hat'correct. should have a permit they have okay.eou are saying the notice saying that wasd is correct? and now we near a position where we are seeking vains to approve it at the height it is. shaking her head. trying tonld. >> i will finish my line of■z thought.

may be you can come up. f thi replaced the existing fence is o 3 feet. so -- the department said you need a permit y have one notice of violation. like --rt summary? if they replace it like t photo show on the exhibit b that may be considerable city plan and public work and also puc agree b a of now they have fencing of the existing street light owned by puc and part of the public ri >> we are oldsmobile we are talking about and -- better or e or less helpful or confusing isolating the what is in our purview. >> yes. >> want focus on the the fence need a permit. did it, a permit at this time it is tall are then and there 3 feet and tedid not

have a permit. case. >> may i gift a chance to -- we did apply for a permit when dbi asked us to. and when we were trying to gete variance to 4 foot height we went throughout variance process with planning department. pla ing department did approve the 4 foot height of the fence in that was recorded with the assessor office in y d they continuing ie a variancapproved. do- so what this. good question i see that dpw approved a variance on this. in their on h june 13th of this year. so 2019. once we got the variance for the

t fence it went to planning for approval. planning approve today and went dpw for approval and dpw thenel the fence permit you have dp wuing other things the recent fence repair permit was not comple dbi is preventing it from being completed they say other things need to happen untrue part of a case. because of that dpw is holding the permit that is could not complete it. >> yea. >> i would dispute that fact dbi isot upholding the permit it is dpw at the mo dbi already approve today waiting for dpw's ok >> got it. >> how does this last -- sorr how does this determination in june there is an all right from. how does that affect where

>> i believe the later from public works the appel appeald that to the board of appeals and the appla prevailed there. >> i will let her. >> i wanted say thank you for your your thorough repo. know y a lot of time >> thank you very much. >> so, we we tried t the fence perimism we had the variance, depw put a h saying we needed an encroachment. we applied for that and then dpw denied it because of the other things they said are wrong, which areuntrue. and we appealed the denial of the minor sidewalk permit to the board of appeals. and we did pil in that case. and though prevailed

dpw is still saying we have to ho things before than i will release the fce repair per nay is in process and will file a mandate based on that order. >> thank you.isoner williams. >> appellate? earlier you said that the department dbi the obstacle william permit issued they did someone erroneous or made erroneous decisions? what decision what are the facts behind that statement. there were errors that is causing the tbe issued. >> that is not what i meant to there was no blight or dangerous property when original request for fence repair was issued. and we stip complyd and applied for a fence

permit. and this permit is held by and not letting us complete it dpw is saying thatheou to do a bunch of other things and so it iseldpw we would have finished it if they woe allowed us to. >> other than the thank you for the materials. and i think issue we have is a lot we don't risdtion. this is we are a building can't sends an order to court and say have you to hear this we sdroept this jurisdiction. butth errors in factual legal errors? by the department you believe are yet permit has not been issued? the permit has not been issued dpw isg on to it.

dpw release today we could finish the and the order of abatement was filed because the permi held, it is not our paul the order of abament we are asking to be over turned the order of abatement was filed because ther i holds on the permit and we can't finish because dpw is holding the permit.issioner . skwoo chicken a egg. >> yes. ry pnt the permit was applied for in2017. it is taking awhile. >> indeed.not saying that is t appellate's or dpw's fault it has been there for a bit. >> right. >> i want to provide additiona dpw discoverdd violation in front of the property

and the fire table and the unauthorized gas pipe the this dbi violation alone is easily issue. they can either legalize the fike this or they can reverse it back to the as legal continue like the requirement no more then and there 3 feetr not like this solid appellate choose to go by this way is theirisn that delay the compliance. dbi determination order of abatement in march of left year is accurate and should be uphold. i don't remember what i was go t commissioner alexander-tut. can hear more about the dbi

has issued couer permit for the fence? can i hear more when we approved >> i'm saying part of the apication planning has to look, dbi look and dpw at it. city planning begin approval and dbi pending dpw's sign off it is one step. >> that's wanting to hear. commissioner. >> so. e appellate i had a couple questions. so may be opening up a can worms. you know youror rew leaf resends the dbi notice of violation iss holdings and other things. you know if you are looking for

mification of the order i believe we look at the whether there is a substantial error in l or fact by the department. and also c modifications if you know if the appellate can show -- i'm wondering is there a hardship prevented reducing the fence top 3 feet or removing the fengs ar. and why senors to get permit? some of those facts are missing here. the extent we can consider that may be a m i guess would be the only other part of it. >> certainly. apply for the rig after dbi did their inveigation. when we applied, they requested a variance from plan tow

the 4 foot height of the haftically 4 footence was 4 feet. we did get a variance approved with the city. that has been completed. and when dbi did sign off on th■ permit, planning signed off on the permit and dbw based on a claim that our ease am is not an easement it is a city owned unpaved sidewalk. because dpw is claiming our private property easement where the fire table is -- they are is city owned sidewalk that's why they are holding on the fen repair permit. they are telling us we need tore property before they will allow the fence permit to be completed. we are challenging that. there is a question of law is challenged with dpw's claims.

commissioner sommer do you sorry. we are talking built fence, right? lines? just the fence. i mean to answer your quen may be i'm hearing they did not do that they don't think thet is writtening they think they are asked to do that for a as that are not applicable. i'm -- okay. if someone issues a violation. and you have an amount ofit. it was addressed i mean the proces started permits were received or not recd but

reasons outside of the control will so -- in that forces an order of abatement. is am i? >> whe the notice of violation is written well is compliance deadline. if not met, or notnes it is not moving forward willor a directive hearing that is what the hearing officer issued theo. >> but if it is moving forwaer then and there is a long time ago and timelines are hard to track here what if it is being address in the good ilth fathe discretion of the hearing officer. could be case where they filed a permit years ago and no action. it is the discretion of the hearing officer what to dom can issue under of abatement. return case to issue add vise am which says

have you 30-days to sort itout. at the end an order will be issued >> theres no further context given to that decision. we know w decision was which was the issue order of abatem>>.0 i don't want to read hearing mind there was right. and that -- i pe. mean -- there are reasons i think there is like nuance to it. i mean. just i was reading board of appeals t did overrule or sorry they held for the appellate. so -- thi s is moving forward. weou not be opposed giving more time to sort this with department of public works it is

the hurdle here >> that means ay on the order of abatement? or i'm sorry i don't havems correct. >> i will defer. >> hold it intent for a certain time. it is on holds because we feel there is good reasohings are moving forward and thoeld and allow more time i acknowledge 7 years, yes a time. i mean 7 years the board appeals hearing was only -- i believe july i'm not sure. it is recent. >> right. [inaudible]. >> right. i don'ow in control of that. the timing of that if that is -- is this because appellate did not file that for this amount time or because we whatever cases don't get heard for an amount of time? >> i'm sorry what were you

asking b. sayth the this is board ofappeal's the appellate appealed the decision with publicks had to get the decision from public works then app that was heard by the board of appeals. >> they board found in favor of the appellate and overruled ment of public work's order. so that the time fr that is you needed public works first when they got that decision appeal today and it on the calendar first available time. seems in favor of holding in bay. for some a time potential low. notice of violation seems like it w psent low issued. department standoth street you

look and see a o permit. over 3 feet. fine. right. at require a permit. appellate received that andd okay. filed for permit and a number of issues come up. i'm trying to be consistent how we have done this before a what is our actual purview and appropriate? all of you hear in the gray and make its a challenge to make sure we are consistent. >> so the board you are correct in that. your jurisdiction is limited in many way in that you a focusing on whether the order of abatement whether there is legal error or factual error. and so i want to reminds the board of it is whether or not what happened when dpw like there may be a writ to the

su that may take time. whher the order of abatement was properly issued. whether a legal error or a factual error in issuing that there is flexibility? ror on the part of the appellate they did everything from what i understand did y we supposed to be doing in the time and what do we do then? right. you can either reverse it if you think that there is a basis to reverse i or as you modify it or continue it a certain time. considering whether or not there was s there is some public safety risks in bay. you h tt i don't public safety its a fence i don't feel

there is a public safety issue. somecan correct me.be may i ask may be -- there are others in line to lk. would you like to talk? i was going to ask, if we were to consider allowing more time would that be -- sounds like is hearing was last month. now.be things will although may be -- still encountering other issues? we are not in chargef dpw. i know your jurisdiction is limit in the this it is a complicated case. going back to the question of noe and filing it and i did bring t city codes that say that there has to be blight or unsafe property to file a notice of violation. i did bring up in my written brief and the

presentation.and so there neverr unsafe property for the notice ofviolation. building without a permit is a reason. >> right >> it was a repair of a fence and the antiblight codes don't eed to get a permit for repair or re blight. we got permit and moved forward with it i know i think that outside of the jurisdiction of the board. but to file the order of abatement when we have done everything we are asked and a lot of theel is outside of our control, we nice to overrule the order of abatement. because we have done everything we were asked. >> i hear . can you answer my previous question if we werestead of ove allowing more time to get worked out would that do you feel like things are moving forh that they will be resolved

based. >> i kw how long with the we have a current court case goingn an additional writ about the entire case. so that is am not happen nothing parallel and so the writ os not2 months thaurn in i don't know how long that will take going to the court system. i l not be penalized for g that we asked that's what our request is to penalize us for following the requests of our city. commissioner alexander-tut. so, i'm trying to ground this in building code. so w there is replacement fence violated the code? fencing that feet you need a permit that is

true. it was you know inspector came out issuing the nov and a permit filed. dbi signed off on the we said meets our codes. so within the building code, itself what is not other depar of the permit in dbi it like the building code concerns resolved am i wrong? >> i think -- d. building inspection issued the builng permits with the appropriate approvals from the other departments in the city. re the issuing d. but we don't issue it every concerned department has signed off on it. building code issues. correct. >> building code issues on the plans were submitted for the permit application remember

approved by our plan checker. does not believe we issued a permit. >> i'm trying tonld like within the things in control where are we? >> i add i next step after a permit is issued inspection to make sure it is build according to plans and cocorrect. they are plans not -- the plans meet with the -- second step, correct. >> and -- is itrect that dpw combined the notice of violation of the fence with nonbuilding code related items? i'm not familiar with dpw's case. >> yea. this is out of ourscpe. if anyone knows this to be true?

i think the review is independent based on code. but i believe the appellate they can resolve this issue stands alone from dpw if restore the fence back to 3 feet or lower. so -- they don't have to wait for the dpwprov. may be the encroach am permit the fence that may be to public right-of-way. however they have other consideration because ofr and the gas pipe situation. that takehem longtory consider. i,000 perspective. i will just say, i feel bit conflicted in making if the city has a due process r

somebody is going through it i feel conflic punishing for it and holding them to a line they createed write someone through due process. which prevailed in. and so -- i'm -- i'm also -- more time.ut solutions that -- time seems like a long time fro? >> i- commissioner sommer,

commissioner alexander-tut, i -- think inhiase there were -- as i see the the department did not have an error in law in fact. also i disagreeith the notify notion the appellate had done th the blgsd of the fence without the permit is n like a criminal morally depride didn't comply with it. and y however, i would be inclined to use our authority to the extent we have it because the department has not presented evidence this is a threat to public health and safety at all authority to provide a dit ithe appellate does not give us a proposal for what the modification would be i don't

know how we can do it. if it is a time -- perhaps the appellate if you want to make a proposal here that we consider. but that's my position thus me. and may be all i got on this. so. request is overrule the order of abatement. we are moving forwd. removeing time line because dbi signed off oit. would be our request. along with the for the order of abatement. thank you.

i appreciate that i it is heard for you to do t well is no error. that is thepoint. i mean that's clearly our purview. that's why said there is flexibility and -- for uso overrule it wholesale is we can do it, is a hard are ask because we try to be consistent from case to case. f thing. i mean that said i is -- i'm open to discussions of what and like open to may be that's not helpful. that's not the way to go? what are your thoughts?m■p

i agree with you commissioner sommer. that -- to essential low just 3 out order of a because there is compcations. to me i wanted -- feel comfortable and would not fee like would be me applying the law as itpp this commission. if we if i voted just over turn the without demonstration of an error by the department in lawr fact. modification? yea. but if be between this and if tell betweenup holding the order or out i vote toup hold it. that's whe i am on it.

commissioner shaddix. thank you. thank you for your tatn. it was well done. i appreciate t. i was upon grinding my teeth like come on. i am sort of with commissioner williams that the fence was without the permit. i'm with you all the way this. mmissioner here just think as a completely tossing out -- meet commissioners i'm more than o -- add more time. that's where i i do appreciate your presentation and feel the frustration. yo ming this forward you are doing it. so i fingers crossed tell get done aeautul job and coming out with the chain

saw and taking the foo off the to which fence is going through my minds that does not seem like that's where i am, thank you. commissioner sommer. >> yes. i was note, say the notice of violation for building without a permit are hard for me. but we put things in the same category if you built an addition toouse as a new fence. replacing an old fence we havei. you know. so -- tse in my minds there is you know we try to vie apply the same to everything in re are differences in the way in with -- some of the different case present. so. a thought there. so then are we talking about

what in holding at bay for 6 months? what does this mean? ha or sorry. ahead. if you decide for180 day they would have at least 180 dayso make the corrections before an . right. >> yes to get the permit andle. before the recorded, the order of abatement. >> june? commissioner alexander-tut go and you will go. >> okay.

>> with the order of bay if 180 mir or complete the work would that include the 180 day in alternative reduce the height to 3 feet? >> all right. my verification question. commissioner sommer? >> 180 days if we are s in the legal system and stuff not move forward they don't want to take the off the fence does this mean you enforced the order of abatement theyale again we are back here again? i have to think. i don't know. i mean -- in my minds i would this to be something to help get the collusion rat a ki.

may be there is no way to tell. >> my recollection is like a -- the sames voting today except 90 days in the future. if it isll resolved by 90 days it is automatic decision one or the other and never come back here. >> right. >> hink so. >> yea. >> that soun. >> and then the alternative to table this and revisit it 90 days or sick months or -- in the future. those other 2 nondecision today decisions in front of us. >> right. . i don't want to i was read being the boar decion. what they did is overruled the

d. publiks denial of the permit and asked them to rereview it again with the conscience laid fourth on the letter. tell be 4 foot high is what public work system asking. to 4 feet >> last page of -- yea the fence is 4 tall. >> as stated they have other hangups. >> that are not building. does not look like dpw will approve as is there are requirements. >> yea. will -- need to be met >> is this part of the appeal hearing the appellate. appeals denied the permit for encroachment and the board of appeals overruled that denial and asked to review it. with the conditions that the

board the dpw submitted to the board of appeals on the last page oftareport. >> i read that but requirements there. >> >> they still disagree with? >> i so. >> so. again out of our -- >> i'm sorry trying. we had said we are waiting to see if w would approve the fence? for our approval go through. they said yes if you do certain things. i asked before where do that put the process that we are ■m now. the process is handses of the e a the d. public works they have to come to an agreement of meets public works code before than i sign

off o building permit then can be issued. >> do we know the time >> they near litigation. >> i'm say figure we say hold abanes for 180 days i'm fine with, it may or may not be fu i would love for it to be and everything to are be are resolved in 180 days. we are not in control of that. and i'm fine, too, if we wish to be hopeful and make that our decision ofeal with it now. i don't unreasonable. hold if for 0 days. sounds like the challenge is -- making a motion?ds like what wa the challenge is that after 180

a decision made that is not in our necessarily. whether or not. the order of abatement go in affect. e as though we said yes we agree with the department today. order of abatement assessment o not be >> correct. i don't know. i'm not in charge of that. >> you are sounds like potentially not. but -- it would b nice if it were probably for eryone. >> dpw clear what they would standards to ave the permit is. right. >> the appellate disagrees with that. >> right. >> so. i would like to make a motion thoeld for 180 days. see if the parties outside of c.

motion it uphold the order of abatement assessment of costs and bay for 180 days >> correct. >> a second. >> i will second. who? >> motion? by commissioner symptom and second by commissioner a roll call vote on the president chaff evidence. >> yes. >> commissioner exanr-tut. >> yes. >> commissioner shaddix. >> yes. >>ommiioner sommer. >> yes. >> commissioner williams. >> aye. >> that motion carries unanimously. >> next is general public comment. is there general public comment for items not oth abatement appeal's board agenda?

>> seeing 91. adjournment. a motion to jon? >> moved. >> second. >> and there is a motion and second. adjourned it is 10:44 meeting will reconvene in the next minutes as building inspection commission. (music).

most famous that lding one of as many of 15usd commuters pass through that each gay. >> ne othe things that one has to keep in mind regarding san franciounsco i the

city we are. and nothing is realpening here before the gold rush. a small spanish in the presidi and were couriers and fisherman that will come in rest and repair their ships but any given time three hundred people in s francisco. and then the gold rus happened. by182948 individuals we are here to star >> by 1850 roughly 16 thousand ships in the bay andeft town in search of goldea their

ships behind so they scraped and had the ships in the bay andriey that san francisco was and you look at a map of san francisco have a uniquetr grid and one of the thing is those streets started off in extremely longpiers. but by 1875 they know they needed more so the ferry building was built and it was a long affair and the first cars turned around at the ferry building and p people and goods and then last night the street light cars the trams came to that area also. but by the late 1880seeded something better than the ferry building. a b

passed for $600,000. a new ferry building i would say 800 thousand for a studio apartment in san francisco thought that was a grand ferry building had a cpetition to hire an architecture and choose a young aspg architect and in the long paris and francisco had grand plans for this transit station. he proposed the beautiful new building w it wider, there is none tonight. than that actually isu price of concrete quitclaim how and was not completed and killed. but it opened a greater m ully operational before 98 and first carriages and horses for

the primary mod transportation but market street was built up serve tram lines and streetcars couldu to the door to embarcadero to to nob hill fisherman's area. and then the earthquake hit in 190ixhe ferry building collapsed the only thing had to be corrected once the facade of the tower. and 8 percent of the city would not survive the buildings collapsed the s budges and the trams were and buildings had to highland during the fire after the actuate tried to stop

the mask fire in the city so think of a dennis herrera devastation of a cable car they wes the streets were torn up and really, really wanted to have a popular sense they were on top of that but two weeks after the earthquake kind of rigged a way getting a streetcar to run on the cable track ran electrical wire system electrical cars but the earthquake gave them to chance to show how electrical cars and we're going to get on top this. >> take 10 years for the city to rebuild. side ferry use

increasing for a international n 1950 and people mmunity center the ferry f a building was. it was the center for celebration. the upper level ry building was a gathering place. also wheneve there was a war like the filipino war or world war two had a parade on market streethe have banners and to give you an idea how central to the citywide at is what page brown wanted to to be a place in that ferry building h day the busiest translation placee world how people got around

pendent on that in 1915 of an important year that was our int 18 million living in san francisco and that supposedly to celebrate the open of panama differential but back in business after earthquake and 22 different ferry boats to alamed and one had the and 80 trips a day a way of life and in 1918 san francisco was hit hard by the flu pandemic and city had mask mandates anyone caught without a doubt a mask had a risk er being arrested and san francisco was hit hard by t pandemic like other places and rulesbasks wearing and

what we're supposed to be more masks on i read was that on the ferry those guys wanted to smokr masks and getting trouble so two would be hauled away. >> the way the ferry building wa the lower level with the natural light ws used for take it off l storage. the second floor was where passengers offloaded and all those people would spill out and central stairwayf building that is interesting point to talk out because such a large building one stairway and we're talking abou the cost meare not

building a pedestrian bridge fe tually added in and in 1918 was but within 20 years to have san francisco bay the later shipbuilding port in the world and the pacific we need the iron that. as the ferry was at the peak two bridges to reach san and automobiles were a popular item that p wanted to drive themselves around instead of the as a result marin and otheroots varnished. the dramatic i ferry usage was staggering who was using the ferry that was a

novelty r a transportation but the ferry line stopped one bney because everyone was getting cars and wanted to d cars were a big deal. take the care fry and to san francisco and spend th day or for a saturday drive but really, really changedhavin >> when the bay bridge was bu a train that went along the lower level so that was a major stay and up where our sales force transit center is now another way of getting into the city little fe a purpose. >> what happened 40 and 50's because of this downturn we were trying to find a purpose a

number of proposals for a world trade center a wanted to build it own the p in a terrible idea objective never down including one that had too tall towers a trade cew york but a tower in between that a part of ferry building and completely impractical. after the cars the tower administration wanted keep americans deployed and have the infrastructure united intrastate free plan the plan for m freeway systems to go throughout san francisco. and so the developers came up with the bay bridge anded their way

along embarcade the plans were to be very, very for that through town he once the san frais had human services agency happeningougheo hall offender that the fre was dropped and we had the great free to no where. which cut us off from the ferry building and our store line and created 1989 and gave us the opportunity to tear dofree. and that was the renaissance of ferry building. >> that land developed for a new ferry building and whom

new embarcadero how to handle travel and needed concept for >> the san francisco ferry en . building has many that ups and downs and h a huge hay day dribbled adopt to nothing and after the earthquake had a shove of adrenaline to revise the waterfront and it moved the bay and plans for more so think investment in the future and feel that by making a reliable ferry system once the ferry building will be there

surface. >>

you're watching san rising. today's special guest is monique gray. >> hi. i'm chris mannis and you're watching san francisco rising. the our guest today is marquise gray. he runs out of the office of the mayor city and county of san francisco. and he's with us today to t o the sunnidale hope sf houng project. welcome to the show. >> good morning. thank you for having me today. let's start by talking about the existingts of sunnydale and their sunnydale the 1940s for a it's the largest public housing community west of the ssissip.

it's about 50 acres. pretty huge. about 760 single story units one to four bedrooms. understand it's an ambitious rethinking of the can you briefly describe the scope of the program and hope sf's involvement? >> yeah. the work of hope sf is this idea of more than housing. ng community, the g that our levels of violence and poverty that are in these communities are not by accident. you know, it's our opportunity to address a system issue, you know, that people need more than housing. they need services. resources. opportunities, jobs and things of that nature. and so hope sf strive to work with our city systems to better communities. lic housing

>> so recently, mayor breed and speaker pelosi toured the a nal housing initiative and also to hilin of the first new building. how many units does it contain n will people start moving in? >> yeah. it was a amazing event. honored to have the secretary here with us as well in our community. it's 167 units. it's about 75% going back to the original families that currently live on site. so the replacement. so i did forget to mention i want t s beauty of hope sf is housing development, new development without displaceme o anti-displacement initiatives. so, for example, the building 16 units. families that have lived there in the community for generationings and the other 25% are tax credit units adding to the affordable housing stock isco ind those

units are up and running now. they're leasing them as w speak. people are picking their units each week until they're up. >> so was this particular building put on a new plot of e out so it could beconstructed? >> that's a good question. our first building was vacant hichou may have saw across the street from this building and then this plot is the way we kind of do it, we do it in once one goes in, we're able to move families into the new and occupying, able demolish old buildings to build the nrea ha units that were demolished. >>s that construction has been able to continue during the covid-19 pandemic. challenges that needed to be e overcome and how the community has managed during thecrisis? >> that's a great question.■s■7

you know, in san francisco, if i understand it correctly, i could be wrong, i believe hous service. the mayore strg commitment early on in the pandemic that weou c to build housing as housing has been a critical issue in our city. so the housing part hasn't impacted us too much. 67ts going on its current time line. the bigger challenge for us wa communities, low income families had the resources we need to survive tndemic. many of our families didn't have the luxury of working from home, working in the zone and things of that nature. making sure they had access to covid testing and things of that nature. so it to give a big shoutou to our service providers across for those that don't know, hope

sf is four sites. sunnydale is one of the four sites. and so across those four sites, the most critical thing was ma folks in these neighborhoods which have historically have been disconnected from resources have the things that they n to remain healthy, to, you know, survive t we all had to survive the pandemic and we did pretty well. wo bng back scenes and covid testing on site. futio was happening all throughout the week. wellness services and things of that nature were all happening on site thanks to our resident providers across the sites. expect the next set of uld we residents to be ready? -- i guess we just said covid doesn't have an impact on the sc when will the next residences be ready? >> yeah. re rolling. we have block a3 the building

referring to earlier. and things are o pace. things are going really well. so we're looking at starting construction spring of 2022 and that will be 170 units and the goal is to have that lease upn. i really appreciate you coming on the show, mr. gray. thank you for giving time today. >> thank you, chris, and i tim realas well. >> and that's it with this episode. you've bee watching san francisco rising for sfgov tv i'm chrisan anks so much for w. >> at san francisco animal care and control, we care for all

animals, any species. we get aut 10,000 a year. they can be injured, lost, victime or violence, and we take them all in and we care for them. >> i felt really passionate about getting the spca building. i had personally seen first hand when my family was for our first rescue dog what conditions a lot of the animals and the staff from a.c.c. where working in. >> we were really excited to be moving this new shelter. our current physical plant is i. i like to describe it as the building is working against rather than for us. this shelter was put together in months, 30 years ago, in a building that is now0 years old. our staff and our volunteers are amazing and wonderful, and they are warm, but the space makes it difficult for peoe to connect with the pets because we have families coming into adopt have families surrendering their

animals, people looking for their lost dogs, aar all crammed together in a very small, emotionally fraught space our heating and ventilation system is very p.righ now, our t capable of good ventilation to prevent the spread of disease. we have no security features. our veterar cramped procedure at a time. >> one of the main lessons learned from hurricane katrina reluant to evacuate. if they were fearing that their pets were going be left behind and not cared for. >> in the event of an earthquake , we need to beff the grid for 72 hours. it is unlikely that we would be able fulfil our mission to take in domestic pets that need to be temporary looked at while parents are out of their home. in a new building, able to meet those earthquake standards.

[♪♪♪] >> we are standing at the site of the future animal care and control facility. that is the beautiful brick building you see in the ndehind me. this building is part of the showplace square historic district which is a collection of brick warehouses and factories that was built in the late 19th cey. blt in 1893 as te original coal-fired power plant for the first street car in san francisco and has been owned and nimole ever since. >> we chose this building for the project for a number of reasons. one is we are not far from the existing animal care and facility, san francisco spca is nearby, and it is a nice nexus city.ve in the cer [♪♪♪] >> what we are doing is we are going seismic upgrading the building. it is u- an unreinforced masonry building. we are going to be installing

floor prate -- floor plates across the space to put in all of the animal housing.e wi be able to get our -- give our animals adequate space we will also be separating our small animals into different rooms. right now we has and bunnies and birds, everyone all crammed in together. cky part of it is to find open space in this existing n environment. we did that by inserting an open the roof deck for another dog in small animal run. [♪♪♪] >> three, two, one! [cheering] [cheers and applause] >> when the new a.c.c. opens and two it ill be incredible and we will finally have the world-class facility that our animal shelter nesy