>> yes. >> did you supply it to the appellant? >> did you supply that report to the appellant? >> this report and this packet is to resolve the n.o.v. from march of 2018? in addition to the later n.o.v. from december of last year. >> it is the same area. >> the same issue. >> what has your conversation and communication been with the appellant? >> it is really hard to talk to him. retried -- >> describe trying. what does that mean? >> we wrote him letters. we have tried to go over and talk with him. he is just belligerent and stops the project. we are at the last section. this is -- we went down 26 feet. it is like what is happening on union square. the front of the building was a three-story -- >> ma'am -- >> you are saying we didn't work. but the reality is that i should have brought in the job card. we had eight concrete pours in the last two years. we are at the last section. this last section is a 22-foot section and there is concern that it would be not -- nothing would happen and so they went back to the original plan and -- >> ma'am, we get it. she asked a question. you

appellants submitted product alternatives that the appellant contends should have been included in the e.i.a. and the department reviewed these and determined none of the alternatives is required to be included in the e.i.r. because they're similar to the e.i.r. project alternative evaluated. the comparisons of the site plans to e.i.r. alternatives are klein you haincluded in the res. they are similar to e.i.r. alternative c a full preservation alternative. appellants look similar to e.i.r. personal alternatives e and d. whether to include these alternatives in the e.i.r. that the department also requested that san francisco public works bureau conducted independent review of the appellant's alternative. public works concluded that the alternatives could not be constructed as claimed by the appellant. the a pal attribute has parking spaces in the alternatives and in particular, they found that appellant's assumptions regarding useable space are not reasonable and public works also concluded that the appellant alternatives would provide mostly small units such as studios and one bedroom

bush's appellate nominees in 2003. republicans under obama returned the favor to a much lesser degree and harry reid said, enough, abolished the filibuster. that means you can get to a final vote on these nominees without clearing the 60-vote threshold. host: looking back to the appointees from the bush administration, clinton, clinton, bush and now the obama administration, and the numbers that president trump's first four years, or first three years of the white house, can one look at those judges appointed by president obama, president bush or president clinton and say, well, these were clinton judges or bush judges and they rule typically in this sort of fashion? guest: well, that's a big question. it would take a lot of study to explore that. i think there are issues on which differences of judiciary philosophy really matter. a lot of cases what you want are good, smart judges. one thing i emphasize about president trump's appointees to the federal appellate courts is they are very, she high caliber. they have ane

bush's appellate nominees back in 2003.epublicans, under obama, returned the favor to a much lesser degree, and harry reid said, enough, abolish the filibuster. what that means you can get to a final vote on these nominees without clearing the 60-vote threshold. host: looking back to the appointees from the bush administration, clinton, -- clinton, bush and now the obama administration, and the --bers that the trump president trump's first four years, or first three years of the white house, can one look at those judges appointed by president obama, president george w. bush or president clinton and say, well, these were clinton judges or bush judges, and they rule typically in this sort of fashion? guest: well, that's a big question. i think it would take a lot of study to really explore that. i think there are issues on which differences of judiciary philosophy really matter. a lot of cases what you want are good, really smart judges. one thing i emphasize about president trump's appointees to the federal appellate courts

appellant's appeal lacks merit. first, before i get into the substantive grounds, i want to address the procedural issue at hand. appellant failed to file a timely brief and the board of appeals denied the request to file a late brief. this means that appellant's appeal before you this evening is only supported by the presentation this evening. next, i want to address why the appellant's repeal lacks merit. there are at least four substantive grounds i want to identify. number one, is d.p.h. lacks legal authority to issue an onsite cannabis permit in this case. article 8a of the health code prohibits the issuance of a cannabis permit if a referring department recommends the denial and there is a sound basis for the denial. and in this case the applying department was the referring department which recommended the denial of the onsite cannabis permit because what happened in 2012 when the appellant was first issued the permit, one of the restrictions is that onsite cannabis consumption would not be permitted. as a re

a couple of things from the appellant as well that the identity from the appellant heard that he hadan engineer on board. sometimes we have these situations and we we have them weekly. you have heard me speaking about them before. zero lot lines, excavation, something is undermined, small cracking, sometimes we seen one a few weeks ago with huge voids under someone's foundation they discovered whenever they went to see the depth of their front porch to do work. it is an ongoing issue. what i would say and i like to handle it where if there is an engineer and i heard this gentleman speak. he is a licensed geotechnical engineer. there is a letter in the brief. i don't know how the next door neighbor wasn't given this letter. it describes clearly what he wants to do, what steps he has to take, which is what d.b.i. wants. the only thing i didn't hear him saying maybe he needs an engineer as well to give him that insurance policy that these guys are going to design this and do it and going to fix it. that is what probably needs to happen. on his side if he's getting cracking on his walkwa

the appellant seeks to limit this to a new two-story portal. the introduction of the pathway was in direct response to provide a clear visual connection that encourages the public to enter the sites. this creates a permeable site broken down to a human scale. the clear and inviting opening maximizes physical and visual access through the site. the appellant demands fewer new buildings near euclid and a 70-foot setback enables a privately owned open space at the intersection. the commissioner heard a request of the housing potential estimated at a loss of 30 dwelling units. the commission felt this was the right balance between housing and open space. and lastly, the appellant has zoning control is applicable to the zoning district b in place of the ncs. the controls in these projects are consistent west of the project and the projects sud will create a more continuous linear commercial corridor connecting laurel village at the intersection of california and in doing so, it provides an appropriate transition from the ncs to the ncs two. at the s

we will now hear from the appellant. thank you. so president swig, will you accept these proposed findings? >> president swig: i think i asked for them, so i have to accept them. >> commissioner honda: good evening, mr. paul. >> president swig: and i think i asked for them last time, which is why we're here today. is that correct, mr. paul? >> that is correct. good evening, commissioners. jeremy paul for ron mallia and mojina poon, who wishes to move into this unit. the major work that was undertaken on this property over the last two years achieved a full-size mistake upgrade and a full sprinkler system, there by mobilizing occupation of the ground floor. the question is what is that ground floor going to be used as? we know we are subject to a permit process to establish that. if we know by the will of this board it will not be a dwelling unit, it will become rooms supporting the unit above. that is the way we actually submitted our plan to the planning department. it was planning staff that came to us and said you really should

they were also submitted to the appellant. we reviewed these to be submitted with the planning code. they don't need to file under a planning provision. they can legalize with this. we are obligated to approve this permit if it meets the requirements of the planning code. they've gone through the a.d.u. process and there's been some issues raised about the existing tenant but that is a separate issue from our view of the a.d.u. i was concerned and confused when i saw the overhead of a studio unit and i appreciate the board for getting clarity on that. as i understand the appellant's argument and even what the permit-holder's initial response it sounded like a third a.d.u. unit. that would be a different case here. what is before you on the plans shows two separate units, the a.d.u. under the state law on the ground floor and the existing unit on the second floor having been expanded. i did look at the permit history. there is an existing permit to make interior modifications to the upper unit that was issued that has not been

the fact matters as the appellant pointed out. i'm on board the that. the facts matter. the fact is it will be oriented east, 98 degrees. >> okay. is it true anyway directional is the more did she omnidirectional is the more powerful of the two? >> yes. he can go into some of those details if you feel you need them. >> we have both of you in the same room tonight. that's a rare event. we need the at&t guy. >> thank you. we will now hear from the department of public works. >> hello. good afternoon president, vice president and members of the board. i'm leo representing public works. we believe that this permit was issued in compliance with the permitting procedure defined in public works code article 25 for personal wireless facilities at the time of issuance. article 25 requires public works refer wireless application to the department of public health and planning department. both departments determined this application complies with article 25. public works issued a tentative approval and the applicant mailed and posted notice of this approval. public works held a hea

and that letter also be provided to the appellants. on the basis that the project is code compliant and the letter will allay the concerns of the tenants and neighbors hopefully. so on that motion commissioner santacana. >> aye. >> vice president. >> that motion carries 5-0. and i will -- so we have -- there is no rehearing period for this. so i will contact the permit holder tomorrow regarding sending information on the decision as well as instructions on how to submit revised plans for special conditions permit. thank you. will you get a copy? >> the new plan, new foundation plan. >> that's not what they are submitted at this point. they are going to be the revised plans that were submitted this evening are adopted and that will include a letter from the engineer. so we will be sending that out once we get the letter from the engineer on the plan set. >> got it. thank you so much. >> thank you. >> we'll have a 15-minute break. we'll about back here about 7:45, please. >> thank you >> we are ready. okay. please be seated. welcome back

so the appellant klipp stated the removals were accelerated. and the removals are a result of deferred maintenance. some of this maintenance there's never been a dedicated funding for. we are referring to the works first. we are going into neighborhoods that have the highest concentration of trees and we are addressing those needs. this year, thanks to awareness of the board and mayor and advocacy from neighbors, nonprofits in a lot of our community activists we have a significant increase in funding for tree placement as well as tree planting. appellant klipp stated our effort to soften the blow by planting other basins failed. we did have 6 of the 37 trees get vandalized. that wasn't 100 percent. that was 6 trees that were vandalized. we regret that. we are taking steps to make sure that doesn't happen again. the appellant cieutat states there's no evidence of harm to persons or property. while there's significant property damage and two injuries to people the goal of the program is to prevent harm to persons or property. we don't want to wai

i want to speak to the appellants and some of the members. public that have come out to speak tonight. thank you for your time and sincerely this city doesn't work if our citizens don't work. so thank you for all the effort that you've put into participating. and i know it's been a long night. but i really appreciate all the work that you've put into this evening. one thing about our body, and i've only served, this is my one year anniversary recently. >> happy anniversary. >> thank you. being on this board. our role is to determine whether permits have been properly issued according to the rules. so in this case, article 25 governs how these permits are issued and we look at rigorously as you have presented evidence as perhaps that wasn't followed with regard to noticing other items that are in that article, which is what governors us. that's the question before us. so when it can be confusing, why aren't we considering heather why are we not doing things, that's the role our body plays. the board of supervisors this year passed legislation

appel. they argue it should have been included in the chapter but similar alternatives were studied and sequa did not require that an eir consider every alternative or combination of alternatives. based on evidence presented today, it is my belief the final eir complies with the sanfrancisco admin code, providing an adequate impact of the project and thus, will be making a motion to deny the ail peel and affirm the final eir certification. >> a motion made and is there a second? >> seconded by supervisor ronan and then let's take role call. >> deputy city john givener. >> just to clarify the item that you'll be voting on as a motion to approve item 23 and take items 24 and 25. >> that was the motion. >> role call, please. (role call). there are ten ayes. >> ok, so the motion passes. we're going to move on to the planning commission's decision -- well, the planning commission's decision is affirmed. we will consider the conditional use appeal, which is items 27, 28 and 29. consideration of th

we'll hear from the appellants. you have three minutes. >> thank you. the general plan does require the adequate study is done. this isn't just something for ceqa. mission area plan has its own requirements as well. you heard about the housing. and you read our brief. it's listed in the brief. but regarding this foundation, potential foundation work, commissioner honda, you would know, if there's an existing foundation that is 8 feet deep and has been abandoned is there a possibility that that's going to need to be excavated? this is not been addressed in any of the documentation that has been provided. so there are grave concerns that they are going to get in there, they are going to find debris and they are going to need to keep digging and they are going to need to do water to get the work done to remediate the soil, even if they are only doing the slab. a two-foot mass slab for a building of this size after seeing all the work at the adjacent buildings that have been done at the greek church everything else, i don't think that's going to be the case

third, appellant will immediately withdraw all pending motions in this court. that i understand to be your understanding. >> that's right. >> you may be seated. >> me and please the court. this appeal presents two fundamental issues prickle first, whether the district court should exercise jurisdiction or abstain as it did. second if the district court should've exercise jurisdiction if it was invalidated of the subpoena under temporary presidential immunity we feel those papers as to both questions and that the court would enter judgment. [inaudible conversations] >> both sides will have all the time that you need to make your points. as i understand your complain complaint, you allege you began producing documents to the das office in response to the trump organization subpoena until you learned that they purported to cover those two terms as your adversary informs us in your brief the trump organization has made for productions that is to after the lawsuit was filed. are you objecting now to the entirety of the subpoena? or is it limited to the tax returns q

i have looked at the alternatives from the appellant and they do not pencil out. spur finds this project to be an appropriate mix of land use in an exceptionally suitable location. we are emphatic that the project's eir is fully certificatable and stand by our testimony to that effect at the planning commission please encourage the project to move forward. it wa.we urge to you affirm thel eir and approve the associated items. >> next speaker. >> good evening, president, members of the san francisco barred of supervisors. i'm the lead field representatives of the local 22 in sanfrancisco. represent approximately 4,000 carpenters in san francisco and approximately 40,000 in northern california. and the carpenters union is excited to be here in full support of 3333 california street development. this is a smart development that once approved will be a win for the city, the expect and labor. community and labor. smart development with a responsible general contractor who pays area standard wages and benefits and who participates in state-certified apprenticeship progr

we will now hear from the next appellant. >> hi, there. my name is kayle patel. i list at the address of the pole. >> overhead, please. >> it's right outside of my children's bedroom window. when you find out this is going up you start doing research as much as you can. your disturbed to learn that yes, it is very outdated reserve and that it refers to things being below the horizontal beam where this is directly in line with it. it feels very discouraging to know that there's no further health studies in that there don't seem to be any fourth coming whatever health study have been done are not long-term and do not include the current technology. you've heard all this before. the thing that yao understand why why are there so many? why are there so many permits for these antennas. if you look at a map, it's like measles. roxanne lives around the corner from me there's another one going down a block away at lion and green. i don't understand why this is being pushed on us. these are service providers and we don't want this service. it's continue a case of nimby be

we'll hear from the appellant first. >> welcome back. you are always so smiley and happy to be here. >> well, commissioner i try my best to put on a happy face. i'll do my bust. i'll take that as a comment accomplishment that my face is sticking around in memory. good evening. i'm here tonight on behalf of the tenants at 108 to 118 albion street. they are sitting here behind me. >> please take conversation out in the hallway folks. stop the time please. excuse me. you need to step outside. there's no conversation while a hearing is going on. you are interfering with the process. thank you. sorry about that. >> that's okay. it happens. so given just the sheer number of tenants tonight i'm going to keep my comments brief so they have time to speak. they are all here to speak about their experiences and what they have dealt with living under this landlord who has been aggressive, negligent and trying to force them out of their apartments. we are fortunate that we are all here together tonight having just recently beaten an eviction attempt