the only appeals are for these two addresses. >> is one permit, the entire permanent was appealed. >> of the way the ordinance was written, one permit can be -- one applicant can file for a permanent has multiple address locations. in this case, there are two addresses under this one permit that is being withdrawn and i agree with that. >> of the appellant for a p.o. #11-114. would you step forward? speaking to the microphone. >> my name is john glenn robinson, and i agree to drop this location. i am for that. >> i agree to drop these locations. but just to be clear, the 535 washington street location is also out in the financial district. how is that also on the docket? >> yes. >> by train to take off the to, we are allowing him to have a permit at 535 washington? >> correct. >> i don't agree with anything in the financial district. commissioner garcia: then we will have to hear the case. what do we do have about the fact that there is no appeal, there is no papers with the address? >> is available for the board as far as testimony arguments and the permit itself. if anyone wants to

i urge you to reject the appeals. it has been well thought out and approved by the planning commission. you should do the same. i support the idea that you're couple come here. there will also be an impact or sailing which is a green, environmentally sound. even that does not appear to some people, it is an inexpensive means of recreation. to see it grow for the youth is going to be fabulous. thanks once again. >> my name is peter and i am the director for the international longshore union. i want to acknowledge the rich blood lines on this board of supervisors. supervisor cohen's grandfathers' part of our local. and of course supervisor avalo'' father is in our local 13. we have some concerns about the cup. we support moving forward. we want to see this happen. in addition to the challenges around the environment and physical issues, there are social equity issues for the work force that is one to handle this cop. we want to see what pete and benefited a work force, a union work force working on the waterfront. we wa

i am here on behalf of appeal number 6-g.ntend to have my clients the as well so i will keep its grief. i have also over 600 petitions of signatures of people who believe that we do not need the additional vitality of these trucks in the financial district. you will see that there are even

i am here on behalf of appeal number 6-g.ntend to have my clients the as well so i will keep its grief. i have also over 600 petitions of signatures of people who believe that we do not need the additional vitality of these trucks in the financial district. you will see that there are even more signatures for that. we are here today to try to prevent devastating impact to small-business restaurant owners. it is going to be, even the six months that has been talked about could put these businesses out of business. it is a devastating impact to have your competition, who has much less cost and expenses, hard right in front of you. you can see that from the very buildings. to apply for dpw, it is staggering to me how they can propose these things. they have said that even though it is cornyn out that the parking or they are talking about doing it, these trucks would violate parking regulations, because there is only one-hour parking allowed and loading and unloading and yellowstone's defined as active as faces, that dpt will reg

i am here on behalf of appeal number 6-g.ntend to have my clients the as well so i will keep its grief. i have also over 600 petitions of signatures of people who believe that we do not need the additional vitality of these trucks in the financial district. you will see that there are even more signatures for that. we are here today to try to prevent devastating impact to small-business restaurant owners. it is going to be, even the six months that has been talked about could put these businesses out o

it would cause a permit to be appealable? >> that provision permit is appealable, yes, but it is only to remove the work from the original scope. >> only that part of the permit would be repealed all, or the whole permit would be appealable it would only be for the removal of the roof deck, but the other work is still shown on the permit, except the roof deck with not be on it, because there is another permit to remove its. >> it would reset for the scope of the work. >> only on the scope of the revision permit. rite aid do not want -- >> they do not want the roof deck. >> you mentioned that was a bit long. what do they normally see? >> people like to get it as quick as possible. a few days, a couple weeks. i am not sure why we are waiting so long. i did see someone was out of the country, but i do not know. there must be a reason why it took almost eight months to get a permit. i just want to point that out. >> i do not know if it is a question for you in planning, but if that is an error in, is that a fatal flaw? >> if some

i think there was a thorough will buckle of the appeal. -- rebuttal of the appeal.terms of the public view and affect of the museum, just as the original museum provided an enhancement to the public view, so the dramatic design will provide an enhancement. this is not a refrigerator box. this is a handsome and dramatic building. we look forward to working on it. we remain fully in support of it. we ask you to reject the appeal. president chiu: next speaker. >> many floras, carpenters' local 22. -- manny flores. in my opinion, this is a no- brainer. it is a great project, obviously, a win-win for the city. deny the appeal and move forward. thank you very much. president chiu: any other members of the public wish to speak in support? with that, why don't we hear from the rebuttal from the appellant? you have up to four minutes for your bottle -- rebuttal. >> thank you, supervisors. christine griffith again. i want to quickly address some of the points that were raised. he cited that the eir does show how access would occur. that is true. it does show how to access wou

is there a special process for continuing appeals? let's get an update from the department first on what is happening, and then we will hear -- is it the other way around? commissioner murphy: maybe we could let the appellate go first, if they have their request? commissioner lee: the first item is 1117 gary boulevard. >> each has seven minutes for the presentation, three minutes for each side for their rebuttal. >> i am the attorney for the appellant. i am here to request another continuance of this matter consistent with an agreement that my client, the appellant, has with the department. we were here in november, requested a continuance to allow the processing of the permit application that have been filed by my client. application has been approved by the historic preservation. the permit was released by planning in the last week or so. it is now with dbi in a structural plan check review. my anticipation is the permit will be through in the next couple of weeks hopefully. at that point, once the permit is issued, it is clients in

that is the subject of our appeal. we have submitted letters and appeared at all the hearings on the project. you have all the information in front of you in your packets. we are asking today that you send the eir back to planning for revisions to fill in gaps in its original analysis. we have attempted to work with members from the moma to resolve some of the issues raised by this appeal, but we have not men successful so far in reaching an agreement. to the extent that the supervisors are not ready to send the eir back to planning, we would ask for more time to try to reach an agreement with the representatives of the moma on these issues so we can avoid a further dispute. our concerns relate primarily to three physical impact areas. the first is the visual or aesthetic impact. the eir is deficient, in that it does not fully analyze the visual impact of the project. a clear example of this is that the eir's visual analysis does not consider the final product design. within days of the planning commission action on th

we would like you to deny the appeal and support the america's cup. you'll be supporting businesses. thank you. >> i work for a report supply. thank you for all your hard work. i call on all the marine businesses, and i have been for 20 years, it has been depressing. sing closures, layoffs, people struggling to keep businesses alive, since this summer, i have noticed a noticeable change. our business has improved and sailing schools have increased action. i attribute that to the cop because there is interest in the cup. i walk on the waterfront once a week. to say it needs repair, this is an opportunity to get some repairs done, make things better for everybody. i think it sailing is a wonderful way for people to see the environment, this wonderful day we have. not just people, some of our underserved communities who do not know we have this resource. i hope he will approve this tonight and get the ball rolling. president chiu: any other members of the public? i would like to ask to the appellant to step up. you have up to five minutes for a rebuttal.

we just see the post card with the appeals. that is how come i showed up. >> once an appeal is filed a permit is suspended. >> that is why i wanted to know if her business has not been affected. >> they are not there, so i would not know. >> you have no evidence of the impact it has? >> not at this point. >> is there any other public comments? seeing none, we can move into rebuttal. the you have anything more to say? you can speak now. three minutes. >> i never know as they have a place there, so that is why we planned it their superior -- planned dit there. thank you. spherby commissioners, i sense e confusion, and we had better shed some light on this. the applicant applied in approximately march or april of 2011. the department provided notification in april before and now the merchant received any notification. the decision was made. the permit was issued at the end of october of last year after the information and the associated requirements have been satisfied. this permit was appealed. therefore, they cannot operate. the

i was not appealing it because i was given the wrong feet for the appeal on that tree. cynthia goldstein called me with an ice apology about that. i am supporting toward these beautiful trees in my neighborhood. this is the view from my house. it can see that. -- you can see that. that is one bedroom looking at the trees they want to take down. here is another from another room of my house. you can see the trucks -- trunks. i had another tree entirely in front of these windows before. this is new year's eve they cut that other tree down. i want to show you that other tree. this is the stump from the tree that was removed. that is what they look like. there was lightning and thunder that evening. i live across the street. that tree was back in to buy a truck -- backed into by a truck. i called the school and said one of your trucks that was working on the tarmac on the playground. one last thing. these two trees, this is the best photo for my living room. can i show these trees? these two trees, these are on the far end of the block. they do not in any way hangover -- ha

that does seem to me that it leaves a question in my mind as to the equities of not hearing this appeal, so that is where my thinking right now is. >> i would agree with that. we have been fairly liberal in these things. this is a situation where it is just a few days in a case where she obtained council, and there is an issue about the incorrect lot numbers. potentially that is an issue we do not maybe have announced information -- potentially that is an issue. we maybe do not have enough information. >> because of the long delay and that she was out of the country the permit was obtained over the holidays. >> if we could amend that to read at least part of the time she was out of the country. >> when the permit was issued she was out of the country. but when it was approved, it was eight months earlier. >> commissioners, i will support that. i have made that same statement a number of times. >> on that motion, from the president to grant mr. restriction request. [calling votes] the vote is 4-0. jurisdiction is granted, and a new five-day appeal period is created under our rules, which

i am with the appellants in both consolidated appeals. that would be the golden gate audubon society, waterfront watch, telegraph hill dwellers, and the sierra club. i am not going to use my full 15 minutes. the eir is large. the commentary i have submitted is quite voluminous. i am not planning to try to go through all the details of why we think the eir is defective under ceqa. the amount to highlight a couple of important issues. but also important to the city from the standpoint of legal vulnerability. the first i want to talk about is whether this eir is defined in its own terms as a project eir or program eir. this is an area of the law that is so dense i am not going to try to go through all the legal aspects, but it is very important. when you have a long-term program that is going to have individual projects submitted pursuant to it at a later time, which we have here, ceqa provides a specific mechanism for doing an eir. the consequences of choosing a program eir for the long term development rights granted to the authority here

we just see the post card with the appeals. that is how come i showed up. >> once an appeal is filed a permit is suspended. >> that is why i wanted to know if her business has not been affected. >> they are not there, so i would not know. >> you have no evidence of the impact it has? >> not at this point.

this permit was appealed. therefore, they cannot operate. there was a lack of notification from the merchant of provided the statement, and i hope it will clarify what happened. >> is it clear that businesses within 300 foot radius? >> it is. however, at the time of application of a permit process, there were no other like foods in the vicinity. similar to what happened previously, a food truck would be authorized for a specific location that may choose not to operate for a little while. someone may move in like this. they got a permit from of police department, did not operate for a couple months. the merchants of this commercial space, a police it, opened a copper rioja region t-- the merchant opened this space, leased it. there is nothing as long as they do not change their merchandise. >> we heard testimony from the individual who just commented of the menu from the prior owner was similar to the existing menu, that they sold vietnamese foods as well. >> that may be correct. we would not have knowledge. the expectation is when we provide

we heard a appeal for the america's cup and northeast waterfront plaza.the appellants included san francisco tomorrow, a golden gate audubon society, telegraph your help -- telegraph hill dwellers and the sierra club san francisco. they alleged 40 different arguments in five have a long list of issues. neighborhood impacts, "parks impact, boat count, funding, transportation, recreation, biology, when the, hazards, and water quality. at the hearing, staff responded to the claims and answer the board questions. the project sponsor committed to not provide the jumbo drawn in the aquatic park cove and instead to look for a landside alternative. on the unanimous vote, the board upheld the commission's certification and denied the appeal. this project will be back for possible action on the agreement on february 14. also at the full board was a resolution appointing members to the successor agency oversight for the redevelopment agency projects. this was amended to address concerns raised about the number of city staff that would be on the oversight body. the b

>> grant the appeal. granting the appeal and conditioning the permit. modifying it. >> would you like to state basis for the modification for striking those locations? based on like food provisions? >> if i could refer to testimony and evidence that was given to us at the last hearing having to do with issues in particular for me and others might have different feelings, issues having to do with the fact that a permit was granted by dpw that would put the operator in violation of parking laws is why i was opposed. we're looking for something else? >> -- were you looking for something else? >> the reasons for striking 50 california. >> i was not aware we had overturned. if you want me to get into that, my feeling is the legislation as written and the findings as presented referred to things having to do with revitalization of the streetscape. it seemed to be unnecessary for that part of town. even though not strong evidence was given that a food truck or mobile food facility, because it would have lower operating costs, it would put the other operations,

some of them are held up because of appeals. that back wall did not look the best in the photograph. >> it also looks like it does not matched the drawing. >> it is hard to tell. some issues with the building. inspection services could get involved in the bathroom tissue and the maintenance of the building. i think they are. i do not have anything with me tonight. >> we will take public comment. >> thank you. to the comments he made earlier about giving a forum for people who do not have attorneys, i appreciate you remembering the details of my bathroom. i stand here today eight months later, six months after i saw you, with no bathroom. about the rent board, they rolled in my favor. the rent board does not have the authority to make the bathroom go back and. inspection has been out three times. i have a trial date set for july 2012. must i wait until then for a superior court to rule if i should have a bathroom? i only see that u.s. the people who can put permits through, i have been flexible about this. i have been waiting for

we will move to item 10 which is appealed number -- [no audio] appealing the imposition of penalty for construction work done without a permit. the application no. -- we can start with the appellant. they keep. you have seven minutes. >> good evening, a board of appeals. my name is -- and i am just here to write a letter on his behalf. an english manor, explaining, giving them a broad, general idea of what he is bringing forward to you, ok? so his name is mr. jose pocasangre, and his letter is like this. my name is jose pocasangre, and my wife is marta pocasangre, and we decided to buy 178 madrid street. the house needed some remodeling. so they began to work on the walls, put new cabinets, paint, and other minor works, ok? and they continue by saying when they bought the house, they were not aware that the house basemen had in legal issues, ok? -- basement had legal issues, ok? they decided to change the windows, ok? the contractor told them that they needed a permit to replace the windows of the house, ok? they obtained a permit, ok? and then they have worked very hard to be able to

the appeals challenged the accuracy of the data, maps, and conclusions submitted by at&t. supervisor we recommend the uses be approved subject to a condition that requires an independent evaluation and determine the mat and data submitted by at&t are indeed accurate. the board moved the planning commission adopt the condition as a standard procedure for all wireless conditional use applications. therefore, the department, and in consultation with supervisor wiener recommends you amend the guidelines to include an independent evaluation to it conditional use applications the battle requirements. rather than an evaluation for the operation as a condition of approval board has been adopted and you have been adopting as part of your condition as approval for the most recent conditional use authorizations you have heard. we would like to amend the language submitted in the resolution. the intent was to generate a list of qualified engineers licensed by the state of california for service providers from which to select one. therefore, the language to be added to the conditional

. >> should we deny the appeal, and a permit can go forward, and the permit holder can commence their businesses, but they would be permitted to operate for at least a year unless weekend edition of permits for the duration? they would have to renew, and during that process common you would have to go through the process. >> there are no notification requirements. we evaluate whether there have been notices of violation to this merchant. whether there have been issues of public health, that we determined this was not an appropriate use. the department can revoke and not allow it to renew. >> i did not hear any of incentive -- any bases. i did not hear you say development might not be affected economically by the exis. >> that would be correct. you have a situation of a location selling specific food. then you have a commercial enterprise. i am going to sell similar food and then turn it around and require the department to revoke it. >> thank you. >> the matter is submitted. >> if i can ask the woman who spoke in public testimony to come up, thank you for coming back. i am confused as

we will move to item 10 which is appealed number -- [no audio] appealing the imposition of penalty for construction work done without a permit. the application no. -- we can start with the appellant. they keep. you have seven minutes. >> good evening, a board of appeals. my name is -- and i am just here to write a letter on his behalf. an english manor, explaining, giving them a broad, general idea of what he is bringing forward to you, ok? so his name is mr. jose pocasangre, and his letter is like this. my name is jose pocasangre, and my wife is marta pocasangre, and we decided to buy 178 madrid street. the house needed some remodeling. so they began to work

appeal of the project. they have remained arguments. they argued it did not match the plan submitted to the department. they argued the visual impacts were not analyze and there would be impacts to present views. staff responded to these claims, and on a unanimous vote they upheld the certification and denied the appeal. the board subsequently voted to adopt the zoning ordinances that accompany the projects, and the project itself will be back before the commission for your approval consideration on february 2nd. there were a few introductions. you have heard our directors share his concern in the redevelopment agency. last year there was an introduction that would allow additional time in by which eastern neighborhoods could not file for eligibility for [inaudible] . we will review and analyze that and bring it to you in the next few months. ancommissioner antonini: thank you for your report as always. i think i have asked before about it this has any president in any jurisdictions that you are aware of throughout the state. >> it is a