mr. pacheco. commissioners, we have two housekeeping items this evening. item no. 5, sashim doing business as mayor marakesh restaurant, the parties have jointly requested that the matter be continued to the board meeting of december 5, 2012 and with a vote we can move it to that date. >> so moved. >> thank you. is there any public comment on this item? seeing none, if you could call the role, please. (roll called). >> on that motion from commissioner lazarus to reschedule 5-12104 to december 5. (roll called). >> the vote is 4-0, that matter is rescheduled to december 5. >> the next house keeping is having to do with item no. 6, ahmad al sharadi, that matter was just withdrawn a few minutes ago and will not be heard this evening. then we can start with no. 1 which is public comment for items not on tonight's agenda. is there anyone here who would like to speak on item 1? seeing none, we will -- i'm sorry, please step forward. 600 monteray boulevard? that's going to be called later. that's quite all right. so no public comment under item no. 1, item no. 2,

mr. pacheco, if you would call the roll, please. (roll called). the vote is 4-0, those minutes are adauplted. >> i'm calling item 4, 4a is a hearing rerequest, the subject property is 69 montezuma street, decided july 11, 2012. at that time the board voted 4-0 with one vacancy it deny the appeal and uphold the denial of the permit on the basis of planning code section 150. the project is an existing large gate to be removed and replaced with fence and gate combination to comply with notices of violation. i believe at this time the parties have a request to continue the case, if you'd like to step forward. >> andrew zacs, attorney for the rehearing requestor. pleased to report to the board about 2:00 this afternoon my clients reached a settlement with the neighboring property owner, the person who is the holder of the parking easement. it is my belief that in order to effectuate this settlement we will be asking the woerd it take further jurisdiction over the permit. it's possible that won't happen. i'm not quite sure what the zoning administrator'

mr. pacheco. we're joined by representatives from the city departments that have cases before the board tonight. dan snyder, representing the planning department and planning commission. patrick o'reardon, senior building inspector, we have aliana crusho and janine young from the department of health and mr. harris from the police department. if you could go over the board meeting guidelines and conduct the swearing in process. >> turn off all phones and pagers. please carry on conversations in the hallway. the board's rules of presentations are as follows. appellants, permit holders each have seven minutes to represent their cases and three minutes for rebuttals. people affiliated with these parties must include their comments within the seven or three minute periods. members of the public not affiliated with the parties have up to three minutes to address the board but no rebuttals. to assist in the accurate preparation of the minutes, people are asked to submit a speaker card or business card t

mr. pacheco, when you're ready. >> on that motion from vice president fung to deny the rehearing request, president hwang, aye. commissioner lazarus, aye. the vote is 3-0. this rehearing request is denied and a notice of decision and order shall be released. >> president hwang: thank you. so we'll move on to item 5 which is appeal 12-056 pat buscovich versus department of building dption. subject property at 2853-2857 broderick street protesting issuance on april 17, 2012 to inger conrad to alter a building to raise the building 36 inches, build new garage for future expansion. you may recall this matter was before you last time as a rehearing request, which was granted. so it is on for rehearing today so the parties can present to you a settlement. >> i'm irving seretski the appellant for the rehearing, on behalf of kate poll voi. we're happy to tell you all the neighbors on the block, all 2853-57 have come to a very great agreement, and we are very pleased with it. it was negotiated on the part of all the principals, and it is really a very satifactory agreement. we hope that you will d

mr. pacheco, do you need help with that motion or have you got it? >> so i believe the motion is from the president to grant this appeal on condition that the project sponsor shall provide a mock up of the skylight replacements and shall provide additional information on the skylight replacements as determined by staff. >> it's skylight and roof. >> skylight and roof. >> both instances. >> you mean grant the appeal, correct? victor, you mean grant the appeal. >> yes. what did i say? >> i think you said uphold the motion or something. >> it's both, grant the appeal and uphold the motion. to grant the appeal, uphold the motion on condition the project sponsor shall provide a mock up of the skylight and roof replacement and we're amending that language, and shall provide additional information on the skylight roof replacement as determined by staff. what was the code section? >> 1006.63. >> on the basis of planning code section 1006.63. is that it? >> thank you. >> on that motion from the president, vice president fung. >> aye. >> commissioner. >> aye.

mr. pacheco to write it down. >> this is a motion from vice president fung to deny the appeal, uphold the suspension on the basis that the ordinance prohibits smoking in restaurants, and on the basis that the dph policy to avoid having the appearance of smoking in restaurants is compelling. on that motion, president hwang aye. commissioner hurtado is absent. commissioner lazarus, aye. 3-0, the suspension is upheld on that basis. >> president hwang: thank you. >> i'll call item 7 (7) appeal no. 12-089 henry johnson, appellant(s) versus police department, respondent. 1195 quesada street. appealing the denial on july 23, 2012, of tow car operator permit for hearing today. we will start with the appellant, mr. johnson. you have seven minutes to present your case. >> good evening to you all. i'm here today -- the decision that they made due to a fine that my first permit i should have kept, and instead of the second one. i don't want to waste too much of your time tonight, but i have a family to feed and this is what i do here in san francisco, tow cars for the last 17 years. and never had no

mr. pacheco when you come up or after you speak that would be helpful. >> my name is george knipful and i live at 118 hancock, which is right around the corner of this proposed structure. i have a picture of the proposed structure from my rear bedroom window. whereas i'm in agreement with my neighbors about the architectural integrity of our neighborhood being preserved and this new structure being a monstrousity i'm also talking about a very personal thing and that's the diminishment of light from my bedroom. currently this is the view i would have. this is the existing structure. you can just apply common sense when you realize that's going to be replaced by this structure. that's really all i have to say. i just want a review about how it's going to obstruct late to existing homes around the area. thank you. >> thank you. next speaker, please. in other people who are planning it speak could maybe line up over there, it would help in moving the meeting along. >> good evening, thank you for giving me this opportunity to speak. my name is karen mandell, i'm a fourth generation san francis

mr. pacheco. >> on that motion from the vice president to grant this appeal and reduce the suspension to 25 days. on that motion to reduce,. (roll called). >> the vote is 3-1, the suspension is reduced to 25 days. >> thank you. moving on to item no. 7, appeal no. 12-103, paul antono versus the department of building inspection, the subject property is at 1123 folsom street for construction work done without a permit. on for hearing today and we can start with the appellant. >> good evening, my name is paul antono, the appeal that i am working off here, it was not that the construction was done without a permit. on august 9, 2012, that's when i picked up my permit to do, to convert this space which was a 15-room motel into a two-unit -- two condos. the original notice of violation was received in 1996, 15 years ago. we had purchased the property in 2005. when we purchased the property there was nothing on the title report that had said there was a cloud on the title or there was an abatement. the abatement actually occurred in 1998, director's decision 3.998 and there was an initial bill

mr. pacheco's pointed out to us it refers to nelson's towing. the top of the letter from july 23. >> right. >> it says denial of tow car operator permit for nelson's towing, not bay bridge. >> right. >> is there a way to clarify, i would think there would, whether he has an existing valid permit. >> my permit is valid because i just renewed it 2011. they accepted my money and it's valid. >> is there anything before us? >> there's no document before us. i don't think that the police officer has disputed that fact. i mean you can ask him, but i thought in his testimony he also said that the permit had been renewed, and -- >> then i'm lost as to what's before us. >> well, in my interpretation is that this is the revocation of the nelson's towing permit and even though it says denial on the letter. >> okay. >> but i'm happy to be corrected by the department, if that is not what they intended to do. >> okay. >> vice president fung: if that's the case we need to see -- >> officer. >> i'm looking, yeah. so that is corrects. nelson's towing was to be de

mr. pacheco, that will help in the preparation of minutes. if you haven't done so before, you can fill one out after you come up it speak. president wong, three minutes? >> yes, sorry, 3 minutes. >> thank you so much, good afternoon. i'm just offering a testimony of one person. i've been very, very blessed to be born in san francisco and served in world war ii and my father served in world war i. so i feel like, you know, if you look back that we have some kind of background here to talk about. without getting into detail, i just wish that you please listen to the voices of people who served in the military and put our lives on the line and that is all really i have to say. i hope you back up the testimony that is coming from the other members. my name is paul gorky, i was one of 35,000 babies delivered at st. luke's hospital by the great doctor arnot in his lifetime, he lived to be 95 and brought that many babies into the world. so, anyway, look at this testimony just that much. thank you. thank you very much. >> thank you. next each member