appeal, don't wait. another aspect of the legislation is a way of ensuring more predictability about situations where a project requires legislative action by the board of supervisors whether it's a zoning change or special use district. and where you also have, of course, c-e-q-a determination. right now when we have zoning that comes to the board for a project, there can be a separate c-e-q-a appeal fired. but that appeal can be filed late, it will disrupt the board's process. i'll give you an example of that. when the booker t. washington affordable youth housing project came to the board, we had to approve a special use district for that project. at the last minute, i think the day before or the day of our land use hearing, a c-e-q-a appeal was filed. we were required to take the entire matter off calendar and it delayed our consideration by two months. this legislation would provide that if the board is required to legislate for a project to happen, the board of supervisors becomes the c-e-q-a decis

, choose to appeal [speaker not understood], choose to appeal to the board. exemptions are only to the board. >> okay. thank you for the -- answering the question. i think that there are a lot of great procedural changes and codificationses that the legislation does that's really -- that need to be done. i think that that's very true. i think the challenge is that there are some details related to what that mean when you start talking about discretionary actions and how one discretionary action, do people game the system and get a discretionary action, a place where they're left notice, no one is paying attention so they can get -- have an easier time in other places. i think that is problematic. i also think the appeals window the 10 days, 20 days, 30 days, 30 days with no notice, 20 days with some notice, is also somewhat problematic. those seem to be the two biggest issues that everybody is touching on. there is another thing about the fair argument which i don't see -- i can't find that language in the legislation because i'm not going to address it. it s

i'm trying to figure out like if someone appeals -- if i appeal a tree permit, is that a c-e-q-a appeal or is that an appeal to the permit just generally and it doesn't have anything to do -- i'm trying to determine the differences because i think that that -- one of the things that's up for deebate -- >> deputy city attorney susan cleveland noel. my colleague might be able to elaborate on this further. yes, you can appeal a permit for any reason. normally through the board of appeals. * you could also appeal that same permit in most instances under c-e-q-a. >> so, the question is some of the appeals may not be c-e-q-a appeals. there would be other appeals. but then could you appeal the permit twice from the same agency, one time being c-e-q-a, one time being something else? >> that's what you do now, that's what you can do in the future. they're separate appeals. one is on the substance, the merits of the project. one is on the c-e-q-a. the difference now is depending on what permit it is, the public has made it abundantly clear, you may have no knowledge because there is no notice wha

there were also appeals filed since 2010, a list of time frames -- a list of time frames for appeals as well as the department's responses to the comments that we've received thus far on the legislation. * results these materials were prepared in response to requests for information from commissioners. so, i'm mainly going to focus on the cover memo. what we did in that cover memo was broke down the proportion of time that the appeal process takes relative to other portions of the environmental review process for each major type of environmental document. this turned out, actually, to be a very helpful exercise for us because it really highlighted that the most problematic aspect of the current situation is the lack of predictability and clarity with regard to negative declaration and categorical exemption appeals. so, first for e-i-rs. under the proposed legislation, that wouldn't change much. e-i-rs take a small amount of time compared to the preparation process. the time lines are specified now in chapter 31. for negative declarations, that's where it starts to get a little hairy.

the internet about board of appeals. this is the purpose of the board of appeals. it is to citizens who do not have tens of thousands, hundreds of thousands of dollars and the board of appeals and over jurisdictions and commissions and uss what happens and you decide. that's all i have. >> thank you. any other general public comment? >> okay. seeing none we will move to commission two which is commission comments and questions. commissioners anything. >> madam director was item 10 not continued? >> item 10 has not been continued. okay. any public comment under this item? okay. seeing none then item three is the board's consideration and possible adoption of the meeting minutes for october 24, 2012. >> [inaudible] >> okay. there is a motion to adopt. is there any public comment on the minutes? okay. seeing none mr. pacheo. >> on that motion then from commission lazarus to adopt the october 24, 2012 motion. on that motion. vice president fung. >> aye. >> president wan. >> aye. >> commissioner. >> aye. >> those are adopted. >> thank you. we will call item 4a a jurisdi

appealed to the planning commission. i thought it was the other way around. it would be they appeal just to the board. but it has to first go to the planning commission. they can't directly much to the board for appeal? >> yes, if you're an appellant, you can appeal to the planning commission and then a again appeal later to the board. or some people choose to skip that and just appeal directly to the board of supervisors. it's more consistent with c-e-q-a to have the earlier appeal before this body, which is the acting body for the negative declarations, because then it's still in the draft stage and it's addressed earlier. c-e-q-a prefers to address issues earlier. >> i agree, because everything else in the c-e-q-a process comes first to the planning commission. and then it's appealed to the board in some cases. so, okay, thank you. >> thank you. >> good afternoon, president fong and members of the commission. my name is sarah jones,. i'm from the environmental planning division of the planning department. what i am do

. -- zone appealable area. in all that time, we have never seen an appeal on any of those projects. commissioner hillis: the dump -- >> the 2012 general obligation bond that is proposed for parks has $9 million allocated to golden gate park right now and we're going to go through a community process to prioritize those. the one out there is transferring that dumped into something that is more constructive and natural. the are mentioned the fact that the habitat value of the area surrounding beach chalet are relatively low compared to other areas of the area. we coluld do a more natural restoration of the community is interested in that. commissioner hillis: why can't gophers be more effectively controlled? i will go home and watch "caddyshack"tonight. >> i will let the general manager takeover. >> i think the gentleman that offered public comment was correct. i think it prairie -- a primary factor in our ability to control belfer -- gophers is staffing. the city is trenton about how we manage -- stringent in how we manage gophers. there are design elements that can help with the pro

to the board of appeals. that delays the project a few months. there was an appeal, one person appealed the project, it happened elsewhere as well. and without commenting on specific projects that could come before you, in terms of the general policy, i think there is a case for reform in terms of how appeals go to the board of appeals, making sure there is some level of community support for an appeal before it goes up, and allowing one person to unilaterally delay a project by months. i wonder if you have any comments of any past or future appeals? >> thank you for the question. i believe the system should be streamlined at one point, and checks and balances be made. unfortunately that is a current policy of the the ministration. i work with the process that would be less intimidating for people to be involved with. >> more logistical questions. are you prepared to spend the time commitment that is required, they often engage in lengthy hearings for a number of reasons? >> prior to the nomination or after t

to hear this appeal. to interpret it otherwise would mean there is no appeal right for this type of denial. to me which is a violation of due process. in addition i do not believe that the police code is superseded by the transportation code or by subsequent charter amendments either. and finally in regard to proposition "e" and "a," i do not interpret those meaning there is no process for abuse or d discretion on this action by the sfmta and i grant case and hear this appeal. >> thank you. [applause] >> quiet in the room. >> well, i am not an attorney. but i will -- i think i have done this more and more is get into some historical perspective. the first time i sat on the board of appeals at that time, permit of appeals, which was in the mid-80s. the issue of medallions first came up towards the tail end of my tenure. did not see any conclusions that went into additional generations following that. the reason i bring that up is because that the point of time the board of appeals there were very few restr

to appeal. on that point the city attorney argues that the mta's was not a grant of permits because it required subsequent administrative action, but that action was simply a staff decision about the distribution of the med dallians. were we required to wait for the permits to be issued and file 10 separate appeals against each of the recipient companies? suppose hypothetically a decision was made to issue 150 medallions to individuals and do we have to wait the issuance of 150 appeals? that is nonsensical and under mind the right to appeal. the only way to do it is from the resolution itself. the city attorney also contends that the grant companies was not a denial to drivers on the waiting list, but the transportation code is clear that medallions only issued to qualified cab drivers. issuing them to anyone else necessarily denies them to the person authorized to receive them and with that connection bear in mind even if you accept the city attorney's argument that a person denied a med dallia

appeal.ng administrator could have ruled that he'll take that dr appeal he won't schedule the hearing before the commission, he'll acknowledge the appeal that there is a right to a hearing, but he won't schedule it pending your decision on the neighbor's request for you to rule that noza extension should have been givenu$: to my client at all. there was no reason why the zoning administrator couldn't have started that 311 process the day2njyafter the appeal by the neighbor was made. and then, if you had1n%( f decision, as you really did last month, that the neighbor's appeal was in error, and that mr. sanchez had made the right decision we would already have had a 30 day 311 period and a request for a hearing. and after the hearing you had a month ago, there would have been time to have an actual planning commission hearing before the n mt of the extension period, again which was 30 days after your last hearing. once again, the 3111 could have gone out when the neighbor made the appeal, she c

they can follow the appeal approval path through the underlying department and then file timely appeals with us if they feel that is warranted. when this next slide shows you an overview of the decision making of the board in that same fiscal year. the board upheld have of the underlying determinations in that year and overruled 40%. of that 40%, the board placed modifications or decisions on the majority of those. the board has a lot of strength and flexibility to resolve problems in ways that sometimes the underlying department does not have the ability to do. in addition to setting backed a deck that a neighbor is concerned about, moving an addition on a property, the board can -- for instance, with a tree removal permits. if dpw does nothing that the tree should be removed but the board is allowed to consider it, the board can do a two 41 and require larger trees be there for the replacement. there is more flexibility that the board has to go beyond what the underlying department may be able to consider in terms of resolution. moving on to looking at the board's budget for next to d

appeal to the board. however, if someone chooses not to take what this says, which is you have 20 days to appeal and to take it to the planning commission, they can just ignore that and then wait until there is a entitlement action or permitting action and take it to the board directly. so, under this legislation it would be that you would have to take it to the commission first and then there would be a triggering action associated with the appeal. the permit that would then go to the board. >> okay, thank you. >> commissioner sugaya. >> thanks. i have a bunch of disjointed comments here. first of all, i'd like to thank ann marie for responding to some questions that i had with respect to the table we have here -- i asked you first. i know we're going to get additional information with respect to this in terms of some more timelines is what i'm looking for. i also like to thank staff for providing some responses to all of the letters, the fine questions that were previously submitted and it's also in the

this business with the board of appeals, taking away the right to go to the board of appeals. let us say your card is suspended for two months. it means s you will not make any money for two months. your only alternative will be to hire a lawyer for $5,000 or $10,000 and take them to superior court? ridiculous. some of these other things, there is a repeal in the tax regulations code that governs the amount that can be charged to somebody who renews their card or permanently. that is a very important protection. i do not know if there is anything else in these rules that would replace that. it has been abused in the past. there was a point at which a notice went out with some ridiculous fee for failure to renew, doubling the fee or who knows what. i call the attention of taxi services to this part of the regulations code and they immediately took back that notice. there is other stuff in here. i have at least a dozen commons i could put in writing. if you are voting today, you are not voting knowledgeably on these items. secretary boomer: [names are called] >> good afternoon.

those were all appealed after you issued them in 2011. those are two appeals. the board upheld those actions and those actions were challenged to the court. the court resolve that challenge and found that all city bodies had acted appropriately. the appeal this week was a dpw approval for the subdivision. when you had one parcel before, they wanted to make it into one parcel containing the residential units and one parcel containing the community facility elements. that did not substantially change the project, but the appellant argued that the eir somehow -- there was information that would affect the eir. the subdivision would not be consistent with the general plan. commissioner borden: the appeal was based on the dpw action? but the arguments were planning arguments? >> planning does review that aspect of the subdivision. the other review we need to do is to make sure it is consistent with the general plan. commissioner borden: are there any additional -- >> they will continue the court challenge to the appeals court. there may be other things as well. >> t

and you can appeal it. it's all very vague and it should be avoided on vagueness and the whole thing -- the whole legislation probably needs an e-i-r and the last thing i wanted to say is there is a letter from coalition from san francisco neighborhoods and it says, therefore we urge you to strongly disapprove this proposed legislation in your recommendation to the board of supervisors. here are 12 copies. thank you very much. >> thank you. [laughter] (applause) >> excuse me, excuse me. please, no outbursts or disruptions. thank you. >>> commissioners, good afternoon. judy berkowitz, coalition for san francisco neighborhoods. the coalition urges you to strongly disapprove this proposal in your recommendation to the board of supervisors. along with we would -- we urge you to -- one of you to make a motion of improper notice because you were not provided with the appropriate documents in a timely manner. i'd like to warn you, there may or may not be hyperbole ensuing. [laughter] >>> this proposal is basically

the ceqa appeal was filed yesterday. it could've been filed any time after the ceqa was issued more than one month ago. the city attorney has yet to make a decision about the timeliness. that is all i will say. thank you. >> is there any public comment on the continuance question? seeing none, commissioners, the matter is yours. president garcia: before we deliberate, would you, madam executive director, or the city attorney, explain what the effect would be if we would hear this? and the board of supervisors were to hear it also? if the city attorney determines it was timely, what would happen to our process? >> if the city attorney determines it is timely and the board of supervisors here is the appeal and decides the underlying and our mental evaluation is faulty, then any decision that this board makes would be moot. president garcia: not mooted by the board of supervisors taking jurisdiction, only if there were to decide that the cat x is invalid. >> correct. president garcia: thank you. any comments? >> i would be

next was a appeal -- an appeal for 55 look good at. this would have been the first appeal made by the historic preservation commission. but instead dead appellant failed to show up for the hearing and the board upheld the c of a. it that next would create new districts for the lower fillmore area and this item will be before you with in the next three months. that is the report for this week. commissioner antonini: thank you carried a little confusion on the 24th street. he said the board of supervisors reversed the see you and then that the application was withdrawn? >> the applicant did not which two -- did not wish to defend and go to the board on appeal. since this commission granted the cu, a formal request was needed. >> rather than -- first republic decided rather that instead of going through the appellate progress, they would rather not have the branch? >> that's correct. >> they made the decision not to pursue at the port of appeals? >> that's right. it is beyond us at that point anyway, but that is surprising. i think the vo

when you became the board of appeals instead of board of permanent appeals. it was to expand your perview, not to narrow it. it was to make it available for more people for more issues. if we do not -- it's not american to take away rights. and narrow things. the way it is now with sfmta there no avenue of appeal. they are judge, and executioner, and if the not for you, we have nothing but to hire a lawyer and go to superior court. we need you there. we need you when there are individual driver issues, and when there are other issues. we need you because the public needs you to step up. and this is the time that you must assert that. if not you then whom? if not then, then when? i paraphrase, i can't say it better. >> thank you, next speaker, please. >> my name is saunba. and i speak for the members and can bring 300 people and clutter your movement and all of those things. so i suggest if i could have more than three minutes otherwise they have to talk and it takes more time. i have dyslexia and i would not be able to read all of these three pages you have i

things will go through, no appeals. it will cut down costs because, well, no appeals. and the time frame would be shortened. and some of these projects that were mentioned, the bike grant for example, that was delayed because the department didn't do an e-i-r. give me a break. and the housing element of 2004, again, no e-i-r. it was a negative declaration. the department really has to be watched. san francisco is only 47 square miles and we need the strongest c-e-q-a laws that could be in existence. we can't lower it to the state level. this is crucial. we live in a dense area and here people are just trying to cut back public debate, public opportunities for appeal. it's almost as though the lobbyists were allowed to write this. you heard some of the developers here -- one developer. you know, for them it's great. for the rest of us, terrible, unbelievable. supervisor peskin says he can't understand what the problem is. he says tens of thousands of c-e-q-a determinations are being made every year and only a couple dozens are appealed. that's a small price to pay to tr

things will go through, no appeals. it will cut down costs because, well, no appeals. and the time frame would be shortened. and some of these projects that were mentioned, the bike grant for example, tw

we look at what the latest appeals of bent and we project those amounts -- and appeals have been and we project those amounts we estimate. supervisor chu: it is sort of like holding something in reserve, basically. money has been allocated for expenditure, and if we end up tapping into it, we have to cut back -- >> we actually reduce our revenue estimate based on that. supervisor chu: supervisor kim? supervisor kim: thank you. by the way, congratulations on getting down from 16,000 to 10,000 buying your backlog. there have been a series of e- mails from residents complaining about the length of time that it is taking for these assessments. i am wondering if you can address that? >> absolutely. your district in particular along with supervisor avalos and supervisor cohen's districts were there are a number of short sales in foreclosure is occurring, it will take longer. traditionally, it would be processed in rare between three to five months. by purchased a home that was on the market, in general the gets processed rather quickly. unfortunately, foreclosures and short sales, because

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'm acceptive of the fact that their argument that sequa is appealable to the board of supervisors. and i guess my discussion bored somebody. >> are we out of... >> do we need to move? >> do you want to take a break? >> let's take a short break. after we figure this out. the city of san francisco sfgtv meeting of the san francisco county board of appeals occurring november 14, 2012 will begin shortly.[break] >> the city of san francisco sfgtv meeting of san francisco board of appeals occurring november 14th, 2012, will resume shortly. >> we are resuming the november 14th, meeting and we are on item number five. >> commissioner, i can't remember, it is a senior moment. i believe that i was talking about the purview that this board may have with respect to a couple of items. one is, sequa and the environmental review and i totally understand where the law is on that and that the basis for sequa determination and subsequent appeals is not at this particular board. and at least it has not been since the charter has changed a couple of times with respect to the powers of this board. the

good i would not want now on line of appeal.e we like to talk to the public -- we like to talk to the public and let them know what they are getting into. >> it would be nice if people could reserve their right to appeal by doing something online by saying you do not have to be there a certain date, and indicate to two or three days from that date. >> i understand, but we are probably one of the few departments in the city that actually picks up the phone. try calling some city departments. you will never get a live person. >> i just called. i was on hold for 10 or 15 minutes. >> it is not that you cannot reach us. we are always available. you might not get the time slot you desire, but if it is your last sunday, we will accommodate you. >> we let people know they and send an agent if they have difficulty getting to us, but i would be concerned if somebody cannot put down their money, via we might get people using our system in ways that are not necessarily genuine. >> these to fees, i am going to assume as we have the right to

there was an appeal to the board of appeals of the garage and they were successful. the board of appeals ruled that because there was an outstanding notice of violation on the building for running a hotel or group housing without permit, that the board felt they could not issue the permit for the garage. that is the practice of planning not to issue one performance when there is unrelated notice of violation, which of course was -- the notice of violation didn't result in any penalties, because the planning commission approved the group housing. then the -- we don't really understand why the zoning administrator hasn't extended this beyond november 26th. it is virtually impossible for the building permit, which has to be issued by then, to issue. even if the planning department was to tomorrow send out a 311 notification, then it's 30 days if no one files a dr and that would mean the very next day the planning department would have to issue a building permit and i have never seen the building department do and this a understand that they have more review do. we have