at luxor voluntarily initiated wheelchair accessible service in our city, even before there was an a.d.a., and despite it being an unprofitable line of business. member, i do not for a minute question the good intentions behind the proposals. there is an urgent need to ensure a fair deal for the purchase medallion holders. but shifting on to others, the cost of sfmta's own previous mistakes is not an acceptable solution. so thank you. and good day. >> thank you. >> thank you. carl moran. m.t.a. put the city on the hook for tens of millions of dollars by violating the contract with the credit union. it tried to quash the lawsuit by the way of demure. and three weeks the ruling came out from the superior court, quote, the credit union sufficiently alleges breach of contract and breach of the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing. we see a lot of the, i think, lack of good faith in some of the proposals. some of them are good. i think the city will have to sell medallions and open up the market. and by the way, the people who have prop k and prek are on the surrender for compensat

their stated reason is to make an a.d.a. compliant bathroom, despite this fact that the stairs to their flat are narrow and take several turns. in addition, their proposed second roof deck calls for a spiral staircase that would ruin their first deck and is not a.d.a. -- is not ability accessible. in reality, we believe the proposal is nothing more than an effort to increase their square footage in order to sell their home for a higher price. we have heard they are quietly marketing their home now. the proposed roof deck, literally looks into the main living area of our family room, which is 100% exposed and is just feet away. the neighbors can have a larger bathroom and a laundry room without blocking our windows. we are happy to continue to work with them on that account and to continue to offer the services of our architect. we do not object to their plan to expand their lower deck but it's unreasonable for them to destroy their lower deck with a spiral staircase and build a second deck on top. especially when it is disab

, which understanding i love more units here but with the existing layout as is, it's to provide an a.d.a. accessible unit is going to be nearly impossible, which is required when you get to four units. >> president hillis: it's even when you required three units and you're adding an a.d.u. to the building? i'm not quite sure it is, or mayor breed might be altering things as her effort to try to get a.d.u.s unstuck from various agencies here, so we should at least explore. but again, i think we're doing things -- i think we're demoing this building in order to get parking in and not three units under the guise of three units. we shouldn't demoat the expense of parking. commissioner moore? >> commissioner moore: i would support everything that you all said. i believe that adding units is something we really need to be aware of. however, adding in the context without demolishing the existing building is the way to travel. i'm getting a little suspicious to hear that a contractor estimated this to be cheaper to build a new building. i kind of -- either it's very cheap construction or the num

>> not for an a.d.a., no. >> step modernization really, when we ire talking modernization or upgrading the cab, we're talking about pulling out the existing one, expanding the space within that. >> to make it meet the current code. that is correct. >> which was to your testimony would impact the building and where we would have major impact to the units in the building. >> indeed. >> and people would be displaced to get that work done. >> indeed. >> to me is at the crux of what we're talking about here. so i want to stay focused on that. so how do we work together to make this as safe as possible for the tenants? >> one thing i was -- i'll make more frequent visit there is to keep these -- make the tweaks to keep it as level as it can be. i come about once a month. that is about as standard for this type of elevator but i can come more frequently and focus on the tweaking and fine-tuning of the leveling and give it a particular load. one person, two persons, whatever is deemed as the average load. >> how many times have you had the situation before and called in. is this the first time

a.d.a. upgrades, are you talking about putting in an elevator? >> i don't know specifically what they're talking about. i imagine if there were significant work on the facility, that could be one of the ramifications of it, depending on the scope of work, but we've asked d.p.w. to do an analysis. >> commissioner veronese: i imagine there are some exceptions to the a.d.a. requirements, because that number could go up millions of dollars, millions and millions of dollars. so i guess i'm just trying to get a sense. what you're saying is everything but the bones of this thing if retrofit wasn't included, is what they looked at, and they came up with $1.2 million for that. >> you the infrastructure, electrical, there's some major work that needs to be done in those systems. >> commissioner veronese: and before we do or start any sort of construction, that budget will come before the commission, and we'll look at actually what's being spent. this is just an estimate, correct? >> it's an estimate. we don't actually have the funding for it, but if that w

a.d.a. seeing is an a +.talking about judge kavanaugh this guy will have broad bipartisan support but what we saw instead were a lot of democrats running for 2020 campaigns embarrassing themselves everything from the complete fake fishing expedition by senator harris or editing tape to try to fundraise off of kavanaugh's own comments to cory booker playing spartacus. it was embarrassing and the protestors being egged on by democratic senators themselves. it doesn't affect kavanaugh as much as it will make uncomfortable democratic senators like joe manchin and others who like what president trump is doing and the independents won't be impressed by childish behavior on behalf of the democratic senators. >> sandra: we covered the hearings and sometimes during these hours and sat here and watched every word and exchange and everybody has their opinions on what happened in that confirmation hearing. but lindsey graham weighing in yesterday really sharing his disappointment in the tone of that hearing. listen. >> t

protect the park from sea level rise and storam surges an overlook pavilion will provide space for bayview-hunters point food retailers. the a.d.a. accessible garden path will bring visitors into the boat yards well as to a landing to connect to the adjacent park. the boat yard's former paint shop will be repurposed and offer classes for area use. and lastly it's very important to note that portions of the 900 innes site constitute the india basin boat yard cultural landscape. we've taken the site's history very seriously. the project will be developed in phases. phase 1 a is the full cleanup of the site. the activities associated with the site's history as a boat building and repair facility for over 120 years have left the property brown filled which must be cleaned of metals, p.c.b., and asbestos before it can be developed into a park. phase b consists of developing it into a boast yard and connection. phase c consists of finishing the work at the park. we have another $9 million in funding pending. we'll submit our permit application for site remediation by december 2018, bringing our estimated remediation start date to earl

crossroads trading incorporated of an alternatation permit to install new stairs with associated guard rails and handrails and provide doors to provide second means of egress, new a.d.a. upgrade of unisex bathrooms and to comply with complaint number 201602061. we will hear from the appellants first along with metallica. >> i was going to say that. how often do you get to say you give testimony with metallica as your background, mr. patterson? >> that's fine. good evening, president fung and commissioners, ryan fung for the appellant. this is to orient you to the properties. this is a two story building on upper market street. the building is owned by c.t.c., presumably short for crossroads trading company. the upstairs is occupied by the academy of ballet of san francisco. the appellant owns the property next door at 2135 market street. the subject permit tonight is a permit for secondary egress from the ground floor commercial space. the problem with the mer my is it doesn't go far enough to -- permit is it doesn't go far enough to give secondary egress to the ballet school, as well. it does not have a legal second means of egress. the two properties were previousl