president goh: i think mr. duffy had earlier said it -- well, they can revoke, but if they are withdrawing, we don't have to look at the jurisdiction request. are you withdrawing the permit at issue today? >> yes, 2009 year? what year, please? president goh: 2009. >> not withdrawn. president goh: okay, thank you. >> only revisions. president goh: okay, thank you. mr. duffy, would you say again what you said earlier? perhaps i misunderstood about the revocation. about the revision permits that were withdrawn and what would need to happen now. >> i think we are getting confused, but the original two permits, 2009, are the original permits. they subsequently got to revisions. those that canceled. those are gone. president goh: the war on our calendar as 5a and b. >> but the work was never done. that led to revise the layouts or something. a part of my visit today was to verify that was not done. it was ok to cancel those permits and that canceled last week and withdrawn. those are gone. the permits, the original p

president goh: okay, thank you. commissioner hwang: mr. sanchez, what comes next? >> that is a good question. we don't typically have product sponsors who are so unwilling to comply with the laws of the city. in this case, i think we would have to pursue the full panel the amount and it could be referred to collections, which could go to public health and seek revocation of their health. because they violated their health permit. we could call on the city attorney to help enforce on this. commissioner hwang: got it, thanks. commissioner fung: it is still in operation? >> yes. but they were almost closed down by health. >> is there any public comment? no. commissioners? president goh: commissioners, thoughts? motions? commissioner fung: move to uphold. commissioner hwang: move to deny jurisdiction. commissioner fung: great, that is my motion. >> we have a motion from commissioner fung to deny at the jurisdiction request. call the roll. about on that motion from commission fung to deny jurisdiction -- [roll call vote]

president goh: okay, thank you. commissioner fung: the building on the corner that was constructed in 2000, were there special entitlements related to that? >> no, there were not. commissioner fung: there was no planning? >> the planning department reviewed the drawings and signed off on them, with no comment. commissioner fung: thank you. >> thank you. mr. sanchez? >> thank you. good afternoon. scott sanchez, planning department. just some overview, it is 161- 165 newman street, located within rh-2, two-unit density zoning district, located within the vernal heights special use district. i think this is the first variants appeal that the board has heard that i conducted the hearing since the start conducting hearings in june. this item was heard on september 22, 2010. the subject application seeks variances from the lot area, rear yard, and usable open space to allow the subdivision of the lot into separate, legal bahts, one approximately 25 by 46 and the other 25 by 50, but which are substandard in terms of the lo

president goh: okay, thank you. commissioner fung: sir, has there been any negotiations between you and the other party. >> when we met with mr. murphy, he said there would be no negotiations. commissioner peterson: were unified in march of 2010? >> we were notified of an environmental impact statement, at which time i asked if there were building plans submitted, and there were none. when we investigated, we found the building plan for another building, not this one. commissioner peterson: thank you. commissioner hwang: in order for you to access your sprinklers and meters at this time, you have to ask mr. murphy because of the chain link fence? >> exactly. commissioner hwang: and how does that work out? >> it is difficult. when he had tenants that were friendly, that would let us on to the property so we could do the maintenance work. but when it decided to clear out the tenants and prepare to build, which was about two and 1/2, three years ago, it has been really hard to get hold of him. as i said, he said we hav

-- president goh: -- commissioner fung: only in my opinion. president goh: anyone? vice president garcia: the papers have been presented for the decision we have to make. i feel adequately informed. i feel that the issues that play into this, having to do with some of the things that were mentioned, like the fact that the compensatory things given in order to get something else, the fact that the bottom below 103 is in and not all of the way out to where it could be, it gives some -- the exception is going to be given for what happens above that. i guess i am thinking, if i were at 50 beale and looking out of a window, the difference of a co- compliant building is not enough to go through much more vetting or much more analysis -- the difference of a code compliant building. that seems like a perfectly reasonable thing to do. .economic necessities. maybe if i had three choices, and a building that were totally code compliance, -- compliant, it might be feasible, but as it was presented to the board, the design for the reason given makes perfect sense, and i would be

president goh: i have a question i forgot to ask earlier. the old building was going to be demolished. can you talk about that 1923 building and its historic value or significance? >> that would be to the environmental review process. it is an older building. my understanding is that it has been pretty extensively altered over time. presidentgoh:

president goh: is there a motion? vice president garcia: suspecting it will fail, i move that we will uphold. >> you are going to grant the appeal? vice president garcia: grant the appeal and reduced the penalty to 20 days. >> ok, thank you. if we could call that motion, please? >> on that motion from the vice president to grant this appeal and reduced the 25-day suspension to 20 days. on that motion -- [roll-call vote] thank you. the vote is 3-2. four votes are needed to modify any department all action. so the 25-day suspension would be upheld. >> should i call the next item? president goh: yes. >> appeal number 6, appeal number 10-26, richard rabbitt vs. the department of public works. protesting the issuance on october 29, 2010 to the university of san francisco minor sidewalk encroachment permit, a chain fence and retaining wall encroaching 6 feet onto the sidewalk right of way for a distance of 389 feet. it public hearing was held on january 19, 2011, and for further consideration today. on january 9, 2011, the

president goh: thank you. >> is there any public comment on this item? commissioners, the matter is segment. i want to let you know that a revised copy of the findings were distributed for your consideration with the change in name. it is highlighted with the date, today's date, if you wanted to consider that. comments, commissioners? president goh: my only comment was regarding the name. i think that is a fair name. i was comfortable with the findings as drafted. >> i agree. i'm comfortable with them as drafted. >> we should put on the record that i did view the video. we will make the motion to adopt the findings as drafted. >> is that with the revision to the name? >> with the revision to the name. >> on that motion by the president to adopt the version of the findings with the change in name dated 4.20.11, commissioner fung? commissioner fung: aye. commissioner garcia: aye. commissioner peterson: aye. commissioner hwang: aye. >> that motion passes. five-zero. moving on to item 4b. subject property at 124 lower terrace. letter from jim flanagan, reque

president goh: thank you. commissioner peterson: i would like to follow up on a question i asked mr. waggoner. after you received the complaint and did see evidence of work being done before you granted the permit, what would you as a department do? >> if work starts without -- if we get there it had taken place, we would issue a stop work order until they obtained a permit and there would be a nine times penalty on the fee. that is the penalty for doing work without a permit as the san francisco building code allows. >> and then they could reapply for the permit. >> you would definitely have to apply for the permit within a time-mandated -- depending on the seriousness, it is usually 30 days to apply for a permit. if they are doing an excavation or something hazardous, but there was something going to fall, it would vary. but in general is usually a 30 day -- obtain a building permit within 30 days and contact the building department for inspections, and countermanding work until you get the permit. it is a s

president goh: this is a little unusual. commissioner fung: commissioners, i think if he says he is representing them, we should go with that. commissioner hwang: it says eric krebs. >> we usually let people appear. there is no board rule to prohibit that. if there was evidence brought forward that suggests that he did not have authorization to represent the appellants, the board could reopen the case at a rehearing, but there is nothing in the board rule, but i do not believe there is anything pitt that would prohibit it. -- anything that would prohibit it. commissioner peterson: it says eric krebs, and then it says bad it is the san francisco citizens against building permit from, as if they are representing themselves. commissioner hwang: i guess the paper that was submitted was for the entity. president goh: we have never had an objection, so i am inclined to go forward. let's just go forward. >> i was here earlier this evening representing another protest, and he has filed four protest with fraudulent names, and that is

president goh mention that the zoning would remain rh2. is any modification of zoning ever done? >> no, if it does not change. it will forever be until there is a zoning change, and it would otherwise allow two dwelling units. >> if it were to be split, would they still meet the requirements, or would they try to double it? would it continue to me that? >> the proposal would meet the parking requirements. that is my understanding. the variance was not for parking. the variance was for the rear yard space. >> they said they have three parking spaces. >> i think it is the same as that case, the parking in the new building and not involve old building. the you know the dates of the place across the street? >> i do not know. i can take a look at my ipad and see if i can find it. >> it is different, because both buildings have sparking a. >> is there any public comment on this item? rebuttals comes after public comment. >> i am an architect, but i am here as a friend and neighbor of the appellants, and before i speak about this appeal, i want to talk about the context stereo -- the co

president goh: you mentioned safety and deployment of officers. would a facility like this increase the need for deployment in the area? >> i do not know. the facility is not built. vice president garcia: not to jump ahead, but it seems to me that i remember the first time that this case came before us that you or someone in the police department had recommended certain measures be taken to ensure security and safety and those types of things, having to do with cameras on the front keeping people away from immediately in front of the pharmacy, those types of things. we still have the right to place a notice of special restriction. we could incorporate the measures you recommended. >> our permit officer was here before that. i recommended to both sides -- we have concerns about the security issues. security is not cheap. it is up to you if you decide to put extra restrictions on that. i gave you the list of what we are concerned about with extra security and cameras. that is not up to me to decide. it is up to the building code. vice president garc

president goh: i'm ginoing to vote aye, too. i asked the name because i have a flash that he might have been a former landlord of mine. it did not have anything to do with the case. commissioner fung: aye. >> the request is denied. we will move to item 5, appeal number 10-07 -136. this is protesting the issuance on december 14, 2009, permit to alter a building, volunteer removal of a freestanding advertising sign, a property owner consent attached. your speech and was granted on december 8, 2010. this is on the calendar for rehearing to be. not every 9, 2011, the board voted 2-3 to grant the appeal and overturned the department. lacking the four votes needed to pass, the motion failed and the permit was upheld by operation of law. on march 16, the board voted 4- 0-1 to grant the rehearing request and to set the rehearing for today. >> we can start with the appellant or her agent. you will have seven minutes. >> i am representing my mother. i'm not going to go into the history and background. i will bring the main points. we have

president goh: thank you. >> we can take public comment now. if people who are interested please line up on the side of the podium. please step forward. president goh: can i see a show of hands, how many people intend to speak in public comment on this? >> we have speaker cards. if you have not filled one out before you speak, we would ask you to fill one out afterward and handed in. i do have some speaker cards already. three minutes. >> i am the executive director of the north of market tenderloin community benefit district. since 2005, we have provided neighborhood improvement efforts in the tenderloin. we are a community-based organization that represents a broad cross-section of the neighborhood, with residents, property owners, and agencies like the housing clinic serving on our board of directors. we held a public meeting where over 50 community members have a dialogue with the owner of the pharmacy. the owners then attended a meeting of our board of directors, where they presented their project and engaged in a thorough discussion regar

president goh: could you talk about the alleyway that used to exist between connecticut and misery and whether that has any relevance? >> i have no significant information about that, but then there has been reconfiguration on this block, which is not atypical and industrial districts. i don't know the details on how this developed. >> thank you. >> the permit is for one of three proposed buildings and the other two are not permitted? >> correct. this is be immediately adjacent property which is of relevance to the appellant. the status of the other two

president goh: thank you. >> ok, we can hear from the permit holder now. >> i am the structural engineer for the project. we just want to make sure the commissioners understand that we have followed all of the planning and building procedures when applying for the building of this, which is three warehouses'. we applied in march of 2009. the process has taken some time. there was notification. that notification, as you commissioners know, is handled by the planning department. they don't even trust the product sponsor the venture that will notify everyone, so they do that. the neighbors knew this proposed project is on to take place. as we all know in san francisco, most buildings don't have a setback. you are to rely on your own property for accident, like, ventilation -- 4 accident, white, ventilation. the other thing, but potentially the neighbor could do, is introduced eyelets and other things, but unfortunately, our development meets all the planning and building codes and is using the entire lot. if you commissioners have any questions, i would be happy to answer them. commissioner

. >> on that motion, president goh? >> aye. vice president garcia:? >> aye. >> commissioner peterson? >> aye. >> and commissioner hwang? >> aye. >> thank you. this satisfies the appeal and it is mod 2350eu in those two ways. >> there's no further business, mr. goh. >> we're adjourned. you are so lost. no, i'not, man. dude! i dropped my phone. oh, the road! whoa. yeah. you know what i'm saying. how would you like to save your life from an ugly reckless driving death? don't answer yet, there's more! act now by slowing down and we'll guarantee you complete satisfaction! kids: that's awesome! announcer: in the real world... passenger: whoa, andy, slow down! >> i work with the department of environment and we are recycling oil. thank you. we can go into a refinery and we can use it again. they do oil changes and sell it anyway, so now they know when a ticket to a. hal>> to you have something you want to get rid of? >> why throw it away when you can reuse it? >>

president goh, should i move to the next item? >> yes. >> ok. we will call item number 7, then, which is appeal number 11-034, antoinette lama doing business as chuck's store versus the department of public health, property at 24 cortland avenue, an appeal of a 25-day suspension of a tobacco sales permit imposed on march 9, 2011. reason for suspension, selling tobacco products to minors, case fd-011-16. and we will start with the appellant. step forward. you have seven minutes. >> i do have this for everyone, please. oh, i am sorry. hi, i'm antoinette lama. hello? i'm antoinette lama, the store manager and co-owner of chuck's store at 24 cortland. i was -- i have for you a context of appeal. my documents that i put together. and with your permission, i'd like to submit them for you. there are some pictures on there. they're very basic, actually. >> you submit a brief? i'm looking. did you not submit a brief on your -- >> i did submit a brief but also was told when i came here to the appeal i could bring something else. and i have just a few pict

. >> president goh? >> aye. >> vice president garcia is absent, commissioner hwang? >> aye. >> the vote is 4-0. the appeal is granted and the suspension is reduced to 20 days. >> thank you. >> thank you. >> so we'll call the next item, actually the next item is number eight which has been rescheduled to next week so we'll call item number 9, appeal 11-037 for raed yaser doing business as white palace licker with at 1324 silver avenue appealing the tobacco sales permit imposed on march 9, 2011. reason for suspension is selling tobacco products to minors, fd-011-13 and is on for hearing today and we will start with the appellant. please step forward. you have seven minutes. >> good evening, everybody. ok. on the day of question -- >> can you just speak into the microphone and please say your name? of white palace in san francisco. ok. on the day of question here my employee, alex, we have very strict laws in my establishment, since we have children and i do want to commend san francisco police and inspectors for doing such a great job deterring anyone from selling to m

goh. >> we're adjourned. >> good morning. i've got my giants cap

president goh:. thank you. the vote is 4-0. the appeal is granted and it is changed to do days. >> thank you. there is no further business. we're adjourned. you are so lost. no, i'not, man. dude! i dropped my phone. oh, the road! whoa. yeah. you know what i'm saying. how would you like to save your life from an ugly reckless driving death? don't answer yet, there's more! act now by slowing down and we'll guarantee you complete satisfaction! kids: that's awesome! announcer: in the real world... passenger: whoa, andy, slow down! because we have a great waste water system here in san francisco, we do about 80 million gallons of waste water here in san francisco, which means we basically fill up 120 olympic sized swimming pools each and every day here in the city. we protect public health and safety and environment because we are discharging into the bay and into the ocean. this is essentially the first treatment here at our waste water treatment facility. what we do is slow down the water so that things either settle to the bottom

president goh: no. >> the vote is 3-22 to deny jurisdiction. >> we will call item no. 5 which is 11-036. this is for the property and building 146 on treasury island, and it is an appeal of an extension of a tobacco product sales and establishment permit non march, 2011. now this is in regards to case fd-011-17, and we will start with the appellant. you have seven minutes. >> i am the attorney. the request is for the 25-day extension for the sale of tobacco items. this store was in treasure island. it was opened in 2008, and prior to that, it was on the island. the appellant has had his license for 26 years. he has never suffered one citation, which speaks volumes for his commitment. he did on one occasion half and an employee -- have and employees of some cigarettes to an undercover police officer -- an employee sell some cigarette to an undercover police officer. i have represented this family for 21 years. this is pro bono. they cannot afford a presentation. two families subsist in the store. the household are the principal employees. they have spent many hours selling items out smal

president goh:. thank you. the vote is 4-0. the appeal is granted and it is changed to do days. >> thank you. there is no further business. we're adjourned. >> a good afternoon, and welcome to the rules committee meeting. joining us are supervisors elsbernd and farrel. we would like to acknowledge sfgtv and the transcripts they make available online. >> the items on the agenda go to the board on tuesday unless otherwise indicated. >> item 1, confirming the appointing of jane wu to the -- >> can you please introduce yourself to the committee, and talk about your interest in serving in this commission. >> i know you have a long agenda and i will be as brief as possible. you have a detailed by a. a couple of things i wanted to register with you. i was born in sydney, australia and have lived in japan and hong kong, and went to school for 12 years -- but i have lived in san francisco longer than any other place in my life. this is a gateway to the pacific. i love the natural beauty and also the diversity, for someone like myself wh

president goh: could you talk about the alleyway that used to exist between connecticut and misery and whether that has any relevance? >> i have no significant information about that, but then there has been reconfiguration on this block, which is not atypical and industrial districts. i don't know the details on how this developed. >> thank you. >> the permit is for one of three proposed buildings and the other two are not permitted? >> correct. this is be immediately adjacent property which is of relevance to the appellant. the status of the other two permits, if the project sponsor could address whether or not they have been issued. i would imagine that if they have been issued that they would be done by the appellant because they're not at issue. >> thank you. >> i have another question. behind this property that is pdr? >> that is correct. >> behind this is the sf housing authority. >> this is a public zoning district in between the residential district and now a pdr2 zoning district. >> this was also previously industrial? >> that is correct. >> thank you. >> the permit a seems t

president goh:. thank you. the vote is 4-0. the appeal is granted and it is changed to do days. >> thank you. there is no further business. we're adjourned. commissioner mirkarimi: good morning, i'm ross mirkarimi, joint joined me with me is super swriesor cohen, supervisor campos is absent away for business. we'll want to take a motion in a second to excuse his absence. i don't expect this to be a very long meeting as i am also concurrently sitting on the budget and finance committee which is meeting across the hall. i'm happy that we are able to deliberate on two important items. before we start, can i entertain a motion for the excuse of supervisor campos? motion. woid, so moved. madam clerk, good morning. please read item number one. >> good morning. item one, resolution authorizing the department of emergency management as primary grantee and fiscal agent for the capital-bay planning area to retroactively accept and expend a fiscal year 2010 interoperable emergency communications program grant award in the amount of $1,227

advantages with the republicans and the house republicans and forced the issue to determine it to debate goh cuts for the first time at. >> speaking of bankers, the indictment of the recently resigned head of the international monetary fund. >> there is nothing that took place in that hotel route which in any way could be construed as consensual. >> that is the attorney representing the alleged victim, a 32-year-old hotel maid, widowed mother of a 15-year-old daughter, saw asylum from many 37 years ago. former imf head dominique strauss-kahn indicted this week for assaults on that woman. he is on that million dollar bail right now, being monitored electronically 24/7. can he be his rap, nina? >> anying is possie, anybody who lived through the duke scandal, to be careful here. i reported this story, and it is an amazing story of police work, and on other things, because by the time they arrive at a hotel, the place was in an uproar. i said to one of the cops, why did they believe her? everybody in the hotel believed her. then they called out to the port authority and set at the airport, "do n