>> dpw approved the permit july 17, 2012. >> and you got an objection when? >> february 20, 2013. >> okay. >> and we renewed the permit march 11, 2013. and that was on the 14th, the west field appealed the permit to the board. and what happened was we received some requests and we wind up having to check with our council from the city attorney's office, who determined that as stated, that these permits automatically approved and normally it would not be appealable unless it is overriding reasons, and there are several cases where we actually had people objecting to the renewal and we do hold a public hearing additionally pending the final decision. in this case, again, the objection were again, based upon previous objections of similar foods, odor, congestion which has previously been discussed upon the hearing and upon the director's hearing back in november of 2012. the information that we have shows that we did provide notification, and based upon radius services it appears that there are over 40 letters that were sent to various occupants within west fiel

i don't have direct knowledge of the conversations. >> i will ask the people at dpw. but the reason why i am asking that is i am wondering where in the code it is unclear to you that this automatic renewal would not be subject to an appeal. the way that you read it, because it is not a new thing if you go back to the statute, is there a section that suggested that you would have the right to appeal under the certain conditions? >> if you piece together the food permit, and the ordinance, and you look at the appeals rights that are afforded within that. and the way that we, i believe that you can read that and that is the way that we read it is that it would be, once the permit was over and the first permit was over and the new permit would have to be issued and we would understand that we would the opportunity. >> could you tell me what the code sections are so i could read it. >> i don't have it with me. >> the interpretation can you made? >> well, it is in section 184-88 of the public works code. but i would have to get you the exact quotation on that. i don't think

for the dpw to rely on the building plan that says that there can be two doorways here and to authorize the use of a creation of one public stairway and public... there is a public exit at the bottom of the property, if you go out of the door down there, and near core bit street, you are right on to the beginning of the walkway, of the public stairway. and if you go out the other designed door, you have got a private stairway where people who are wandering up and down the street can hide where the people who are being pursued by the law enforcement will not be seen and putting more lighting there will not help the creation of a safety problem on our block. the bottom line is there is no basis for this stairway in the other one which was illegal and it is still illegal. and he is going to tear down the entire property. and it will all be gone, including i hope the illegal stairway. we start from scratch with this building permit. please don't let them continue with this mistake that because it is there now, it deserves to have another one. this man has more entrance places than any other

i'll get to dpw part. i actually only go forward with a fraction of the number of requests that i get because the sidewalks are narrow and they have street furniture. so, our main partner when we go forward with a new shelter and also with the replacement is dpw. each location needs a permit. for the new shelters, [speaker not understood] is also required. notice is provided within 150 feet of the location. there's a hearing so that business owners and individuals can provide their input, both positive and negative. so, we do not put any shelter in the ground without a permit from dpw and dpw has been a great partner with us. the preferred siting for a are ter is near the front places where it's narrow. where we get complaints, we do trh contractor to find a slightly better site if that's possible. for example, as you know, we were able to work with dfw to eliminate p the so, imes we can, sometimes we can't. we are very sensitive to the fact that e sidewalks are narrow and where we can, we can. so, with th

by the dpw. and that is kind of the gate that is allowed by the dpw and they keep it locked and it does not allow the people to come down. anybody that looks at the side of this plan will see that the stairway that goes down on the side of the house is not a wide stairway with lighting or railings and made for the public use. i don't have to do the public use stairway. it is just the right way to do it. and opening up access to the land is a good thing to do. that is what it has been from the beginning it has never changed from the very first presentation six years ago not one time. >> except that it was made smaller. >> i guess that the they mentioned that the stair stairs that have been a public stair all wait through the site we would not be here. but i believe that... >> it is... >> let me finish. >> i believe that that is not enough run on that stair to be able to get down to the street adjacent to your home. >> that is correct. >> second question is you are providing and paying for the cons

i'll get to dpw part. i actually only go forward with a fraction of the number of requests that i get because the sidewalks are narrow and they have street furniture. so, our main partner when we go forward with a new shelter and also with the replacement is dpw.

i'll get to dpw part. i actually only go forward with a fraction of the number of requests that i get because the sidewalks are narrow and they have street furniture. so, our main partner when we go forward with a new shelter and also with the replacement is dpw. each location needs a permit. for the new shelters, [speaker not understood] is also required. notice is provided within 150 feet of the location. there's a hearing so that business owners and individuals can provide their input, both positive and negative. so, we do not put any shelter in the ground without a permit from dpw and dpw has been a great partner with us. the preferred siting for a shelter is near the front of the bus zone because there are some people who obviously cannot get to a bus very quickly. sometimes we have a different part of the bus zone. if there is a fire scape or a pole. our preferred siting is at the front. at 18th and castro for example there are locations where it is narrow. there is no denying there are places where

than just approving the fact that they were doors, and nick said that it is all up to me and up to the dpw people to put something near those doors. number one. number two. since i got my master's degree at the university of wisconsin in philosophy, the last century i have longed to be able to use the phrase (inaudible), what nick elsner is doing to the logical fallacy. and that stairway that exists now, is illegal. and to make it the basis for a legal stairway is logically i believe incorrect. for the dpw to rely on the building plan that says that there can be two doorways here and to authorize the use of a creation of one public stairway and public... there is a public exit at the bottom of the property, if you go out of the door down there, and near core bit street, you are right on to the beginning of the walkway, of the public stairway. and if you go out the other designed door, you have got a private stairway where people who are wandering up and down the street can hide where the people who are being pursued by the law enforcement will not be seen and putting more lighting there wi

so, to dpw. >> thank you. my name is robert kwan. i'm with the department of public works, and this report is for properties inspected [speaker not understood] and repairs made on invoice by the city under the accelerated sidewalk abatement program from april, 2012 through april 2013. ~ during that period, the department inspected and/or caused to repair sidewalks and curbs fronting public and private properties throughout the city in response to delinquent notifications issued in response to service requests seedthv by the drape received by the city attorney's office, mayor's office of disability, [speaker not understood], issuing 73 notices of violation and abatement orders ~ and 111 asap x 11 04s at a cost of $8 68,014.97. for light notice of violation and abatement orders, $693,88 6 .80 for asapx 11 04s for a total of $76 2,701.77. 82 invoices were sent out to property owners of which 43 invoices were paid along with the city to recover $9,0 82.[speaker not understood]. the balance [speaker not understood] sidewalk repairs or ins

question answered so you can answer the question based on the facts that have been gathered by the dpw and the question was never asked because everyone aassumed that it was all public access stairway. >> mr. auto. >> okay. once again, this is a two-minute property now, not a single family home, the entrance on the lower side is a new entrance and it takes up two steps of the public or the public stairway to go up two steps into the house. that is how much i am going to pay tax on for the lower unit. the upper unit or the existing stairway is, and i would like to comment on what is legal and what is not legal. if the whole city of san francisco fell down tomorrow, my architect told me less than five percent of it could be rebuild without a special permit. in other words, there are stairways all over that were built at some point that are existing that can be rebuilt in a legal way and in a permitted way. and in good manners, and so, but they are concerned about that my access to the property and my access to the property exists now, and i want it to exist in the future. and everything

the way that they do is has a new permit number and so we had the communication with the dpw advance of the renewal of the permit and then we were under the impression that we were supposed to wait for the approval. so that when the renewal was issued in a timely fashion filed the appeal of the renewal of the permit. but dpw said that the renewal was properly appealable to them and only heard the appeals of the initial grant and so they instructed us to the appeal of this board, when we filed it was rejected as not this being in your subject matter jurisdiction and it is a bit of a frustrating prospect as you can imagine and we are very aware of the fact that kettle corn has tried to play by the rules as well. everyone has pursued avenue and kettle corn about everything that they can, and this was not an error for west field or kettle corn, for some reason west field was not on the list and did not receive this notice, but the point of this story is that west field has never been afforded an opportunity to be heard on this matter, neither on the original permit and sent around in a c

>> actually, the contract was signed before i came on board with dpw. so, there was a policy question and concept behind it which i cannot speak to. >> okay. i know some of the kiosks are used in terms of whether it's newspaper sales or just -- i think it's a flower shop in it, but sometimes they just seem to be a little taller than necessary for those purposes. and i assume that's for the size of the advertising. that's a comment. >> that's not something i can speak to. >> and in terms of the clearchannel news racks, recognizing i think everyone agrees they are -- first of all, let me say it's very important to have newsracks. i know there's been concern at this hearing, some folks in the newspaper industry were trying to get rid of newsracks. no one i know of is trying to get rid of newsracks and i personally think that these clearchannel newsrack pedi mounts are a huge improvement to the old kind of newsracks which were ugly, sometimes badly vandalized, fall over. some of them were just falling apart. so, these are -- i have some areas in my district

and then we secure the preliminary permits from dpw. i wanted to address one of the issues about placement of controllers on the near side of intersections. like i said, sometimes it's just really difficult for us to try to place them on the far side. all things being equal, we would want that controller to be on the far side of the intersection so we have maximum visibility for pedestrians. but sometimes with all the constraints that we're faced against with that near side location somehow that only works. and i'd be happy to follow-up with andres where there seems to be an issue [speaker not understood]. there is no parking for the lane, it's right up against the sidewalk. we can take a look at what we can do with that controller. thank you. >> great, thank you very much. colleagues, no questions? terrific. i want to thank all the city staff for those very informative presentations. and as with most things, i think what this makes clear these are not complicated issues, trying to ballet lot of different needs with some of the importan

become more involved with the process around siting the at&t utility boxes to work very closely with dpw, with neighbors to see if appropriate locations that can be found not just that work for the neighborhood, but that work for our planning goals and principles. i also wonder to what extent the planning department was involved in the design process of the -- for the mta bus stops and whether having bus shelters that allow for basically single-file access down a crowded sidewalk is consistent with the better streets plan. and then similarly, the newsracks in terms of the placement and how many are in certain locations, whether planning department has had any involvement in saying, hey, there are just too many for this location. and i know the planning department is not the lord or overseer or micro manages other departments, but it seems to me the planning department has a significant role to play instersv of assuring the better streets plan is being complied with. >> yeah, and i think it does vary. typically, you know, for streetscape projects or major sort of systematic -- i'm not sur

one of my colleagues might go down to bayview to meet with merchants and find out that dpw was there the week before meeting with the merchants. so when we don't work together as effectively as we can, we sometimes duplicate each other's work or missing opportunities to leverage investment. so invest in neighborhoods is at its core, it's a framework for more effective deployment of city resources by organizing city departments so that we work together more effectively to respond to the specific needs and opportunities in each commercial district. that is "invest in neighborhoods." and i will tell you how we do that. there is basically three elements to invest in neighborhoods that i want to tell you about. baseline services, commercial district assessments and customized services. so "baseline" services are city programs that are available to all of the neighborhoods in invest in neighborhoods, where we're piloting the initiative. and i have a few up on the screen there that i'm going to quickly run through, but we have identified about 40 city services that we call "baseline service

dpw to expend grant funds for pedestrian and bicycle project for 2013-2014. each county receives those funds. each county's local transportation fund. article 3 of tda of portion 2 percent of that quarter percent tax for bicycle and as well as pedestrian street and road development projects. those funds are allocated and under article 3 to the non-bay area counties. as done in the past, they are joint with the county wide applications. mta process using these funds to repair the city streets and the remaining for preliminary and various sites throughout the city that have been selected in conjunction with the mayor's office. no matching funds are required. i'm here to answer questions. >> any questions from my colleagues? >> supervisor mar, looks like bicycle coalition have a say in what types of capital projects are going to be chosen by the mta and looks like the dpw is self explanatory. but i wonder how the projects are chosen? >> my understanding is that the project selected for the tda article 3 grouping is basically from our capital investment program.

dpw as a rule does not do the abatement. so, whether they are or aren't using the correct materials to remove it off of brick, it's based on who they hire or who they get to do the work. we are aware for the time when we did do t we have several different products based on the type of surface. and staff was trained at that time, but that's when we were doing abatement on private property. >> i can just help a little bit. again, from the historic building perspective, of course, private property can be historic, too. but there's a difference between, of course, when it's a public owned building or private owned building. perhaps some of it is an awareness or an education about resource he he that are available. there's a whole gamut of people available to remove graffiti, people who have never done it before, maybe they're painters but they just have access to materials and they are used to taking paint off. i guess farther down the spectrum of people that have never done it before and just want to be good citizens to remove

. >> this is a softball for dpw. i want to know where you get the funding that you give out as grant funding, let's say street smarts. is it general fund money, is there a special fee that's tied to something that goes into a fund? >> yeah, it's general fund money. the department makes a decision on programs and we earmark money for various, like the police and the arts commission and we earmark money and send it to them. a lot of times you'll find the board of supervisors members have support for various programs also. we've gotten that after the budget was done in order to fund some of the programs. >> great. do you have another question? >> i have three more. >> you have three more up there, and anybody else going to be wanting to ask a question? okay, we'll get you lined up, then. >> let's see. this is to sharon. your capital city clean up program offers $1500 to private property owners to abate on heritage properties. what are the technical requirements to abate graffiti from heritage properties? >> i actually a

but were not or were then added to in the dpw response to my original petition. and i'm not going to address the petition here. all that i am going to do is request a continuance. and what is the reason for my continuance is that the response to my brief by mr. elsner adds facts that were not originally heard at the hearing. those facts are on physical page 4. and the first four paragraphs of his response. and here is the issue. this is a park let at the corner of mars and corbet it is abandoned piece of property. the park that has been approved by all of the neighborhood, i currently represent nine of the neighbors who are very, very unhappy about the grant of a portion of that for the private use of mr. auto. we didn't know that this permit was going to grant private use to him until mr. elsner's response of brief was filed last thursday. it took me four days to get my people together and testified last time we were here and i filed a request for a continuance on monday. and neither party has consented to this continuance. the problem is that we needed a chance

i'm proud for munis and the commission and they are working with dpw. speaking about dpw, muhammad and i worked together and we literally saw people who realized the second the bus arrives they can't eat on the bus. so where do they toss it? if they weren't looking or realized there was a trash can next to them as most bus stops do have them. they were irresponsible. we literally saw people tossing things as they got on boarding the buses. that's not good behavior. obviously we need to do a lot more education. we need to end that practice and we need to keep and attitude, a very spirit of keeping our public assets clean and beautiful as you see them today. this is what these buses ought to look like a few years from now. we know they won't, but we need to keep that attitude in the city, not only with our youth but everybody in the city of all ages we see them discarding waste material onto the streets. we have a crew of people picking these up and reminding folks. we wanted to change things. that is part of using the giant sweep in the world ferries tha