covenants support the appellant's position in this matter as it's general planting areas map that mr. fung referenced provides the specific delineation of the open spaces to be maintained, one of which is the open northern section of the property at 70 crestline where subdivision and construction were proposed. lastly, the permit holder has a right with no explanation as to why the covenants weren't offered into evidence on july 17th, that explanation is explicitly required by the board's rules. in conclusion, none of the board's requirements that would warrant a rehearing are found in the permit holder's request, for the reasons discussed here tonight, as well as other reasons cited in our written response, we respectfully ask the board to deny the request. thank you. >> mr. [inaudible], in your brief, you indicate that -- and you referred it again in your oral testimony just now that the documentation provided by the rehearing requestor -- well, maybe that's too strong a word, showed what was the original planting plan, i believe you referenced that. are you saying that the parcel maps t

chris hwang and is joined by ann lazarus and commissioner frank fung, commissioner darryl honda and commissioner arcelia hur tad da, and we have mr. brian, and at the controls is victor pacheco, i'm the board's executive direct torx we're also joined by representatives from matters on the board, the zoning administrator, also representing the planning commission, antithy greco is here representing the building inspection and director of taxis and accessible services at the municipal transportation agency. at this time, mr. pa chen koe, if you can go over the meeting's guidelines and go over the swearing in process. >> the board requests that you turn off all cell phones and pagers so they will not disturb the proceedings, please carry on conversations in the hallway. appellant, permit holders and department representatives each have 7 minutes to present their case and is three minutes for rebuttal, people affiliated with these parties must include their comments within the 3 and 7 minute periods, they have 3 minutes each to address the board but no rebuttals, to assist the board in the accurate preparation of minutes, members who

mr. sanchez. >> thank you, scott sanchez planning department and does commissioner fung have a long history of the board of appeals dating back 7 years and previous issues related to a fire escape which was proposed to be added to the building and concerns about impacts on the potential historic resource here and it has been addressed and they have given a new fire escape that was appropriate and what is at issue here is a revision permit and the revision permit was not routed to the planning department and there is a block and notification request on the property that has been in place since early june. the revisional permit that this permit revises, was submitted last october and issued this last april on april 18th. and that permit was to repair the basement and frame and replace the basement and it was routed to the planning department to review and we review ited and approved it and our approval was from october. and so, we that permit again was issued and this permit is a revision and the description of this, it is a revision to this previous permit cost revision and it does not actually inc

mr. pacheco if you can call the roll please. >> on that motion from the president to adopt the august 14, 2013, minutes, commissioner fung, aye, commissioner hurtado, aye, lazarus, aye, honda. thank you. those minutes are adopted. >> item no. 4 a. the subject property. item 4a: jurisdiction request: subject property at 1980 golden gate avenue. letter from raquel fox, attorney for john tynan, kurt mueller & jason thrupp, requestors, asking that the board take jurisdiction over bpa no. 2012/10/29/2977, which was issued on april 18, 2013; the appeal period ended on may 03, 2013 and the jurisdiction request was filed at the board office on aug. 05, 2013. permit holder: urban green investments llc. project: repair wood frame in basement; replace retaining wall in basement; rebuild one bay windoww>> item no. 4 a. the subject property. sf 41234 we will start with the requester. you have 3 minutes. >> thank you. good evening board members, president. there is probably not enough time in a whole day to discuss all the issues so i will focus on the reason we are here. we are here because we are seeking permission to file an appeal even

mr. pacheco? >> we have a motion from the vice-president to deny this jurisdiction request, on that motion, commissioner fung? >> aye. >> president hwang? >> hao*i. >> commissioner hurtado? >> aye. >> and commissioner honda? >> aye. >> the vote is 5-0, jurisdiction is denied and ?o appeal may be filed on this administrator order, thank you. >> we'll mover on to item 5b which is another jurisdiction request, the subject property is at 3166-16th street, the board received a letter from valencia corridor mer chants association requestor asking that the board take jurisdiction over a zoning administrator letter of determination issued on september 6, 2012. the appeal period ended on september 212013 and the jurisdiction request was filed on july 29, 2013. determination holder is jack spade, za order is regarding whether the fashion retail business known as jack spade would be classified as a formula retail establishment under the planning code. we will start with the requestor. you have three minutes, thank you. >> madam president and honorable board members of the board, my name is jefferson mccar ly, i'm the p

mr. pa chen koe, if you could call the roll, please. >> we have a motion from the vice-president to deny this jurisdiction request, on that motion, commissioner fung? >> aye. >> president hwang? >> aye. >> commissioner hurtado? >> aye. >> commissioner honda? >> aye. >> the vote is 5-0, jurisdiction is denied and no appeal may be filed on this letter of determination. >> okay, we're going to take a short break. (meeting is in recess).