president peterson: thank you. next speaker? >> good evening. and i'm here to speak on behalf of chinese gospel church. the people involved with the mcd in this case have asked that you apply a discretion standard. the definition of abuse of discretion in legal terms is if it exceeds the bounds of reason and results in a miscarriage of justice. when a police officer says that an mcd will attract filing criminals to a neighborhood, to a business that has large amount of drugs and cash on hand, and when one of the council members readily admits there is no place within the city of san francisco that control on a map and not put in mcd within 1,000 feet of a place that serves children in some way, then a completely defies the bounds of reason. their reasoning is an mcd has to go somewhere. safety to children be darned. it exceeds the bounds of reason. apply that standard to the mcd in this case. president peterson: thank you. next speaker, please? >> hello. i have lived in the sunset 16 years. thank you for allowing me to speak. i

president peterson: thank you. ext. speaker? >> my name is peter. i live on 32nd ave. i get to watch the traffic and all the kids going to the 7- eleven or go to the sandwich shop. there was a question of how close are the schools. maybe the previous board really did not consider that. lincoln is about seven blocks, but when you take the bus, it is only three stops. bacon stop by anywhere along that. they can stop by anywhere along that. who knows what they bring back. same thing with sunset boulevard. but it is not handicapped accessible. two stops off taraval in front of this mcd have no ramp for wheelchair's. even that mcd was cited for a.d.a.-compliance after the permit is granted. they picked the best location to fit on the map, but maybe the map did not put all these other things into consideration. the previous board did not ask how much it will cost the city to make it truly a.d.a. compliant for the muni stop. that will cost the city money as well. they need to reconsider. there are a lot of reasons, the ty

and president peterson? president peterson: in light of the number of speakers and the need for a translator, we will have one minute for public comment. >> if you need translation services, if someone is not standing next to you to help you have that, let us know and we will make sure somebody does that. also, i need to make sure everybody understands that public, it is available for people who are not affiliated with any of the parties. so if you are on the board of directors, for example, of peter the appellant organizations or an owner of -- of the appellant organizations or the owner of one of those appellant organizations or the owner or agent of a permit holder, you are not allowed to speak under public comment. your time to speak would be of the party wants to share their time with you. at first speaker? also, it will help us preparing the minutes if you could provide us with a speaker card. if you don't have one filled out already, we ask you to wait until after you are done speaking to fill it out

president peterson: thank you. next speaker. >> my name is theresa, with the apa association center. today i want to urge you to revoke the license. and i really feel that you should listen to people. today, california recognized that legalizing marijuana would not make our citizens healthier. there was a deal struck in the city and state. i would urge you to please listen to the people, because to legalize would lead to more addiction, and especially driving accidents and emergency room submissions. i urge you to really revoke the license for this. thank you so much. president peterson: thank you. next speaker. >> my name is terry fong. i am the owner of the 711 500 feet from the proposed site of the mcd. there is something we call trust. the sponsors claimed that i support their cause, which i do not. how can we trust them in running a good operation and a safe operation for our neighborhood? remember in the 1990's, i tried to get a beer and wine license for a convenience store, a food mart. i had one complaint.

president peterson: thank you. next speaker, please step forward. >> my name is andrew happened. i support the cannabis dispensary and what greg is trying to do. president peterson: you can bring this up if that helps. sorry. >> i studied psychology for about 10 years, and i first met paul and susan when susan was doing outreach, and later greg. they may have seemed irrational or irresponsible. i will secure the neighborhood. i walked by all the time. if anything is going by, i will report that. i am not going to want dangerous things happening around children either. i see a lot of children in the area. i think it would be safe. i do not see any reason why this legitimate establish one should not be able to move forward. we should stop wasting time and taxpayer money on this issue. president peterson: thank you. next speaker. >> my name is theresa, with the apa association center. today i want to urge you to revoke the license. and i really feel that you should listen to people. today, california recognized that l

president peterson: mr. sanchez? >> scott sanchez, planning department. just to reiterate again, there are two issues that have been raised by the appellants -- whether or not the project is code complying. using their arguments would change how we review mcds in san francisco. if we were to consider child care facilities, which are a separate definition in the planning code -- and we do have many definitions in the planning code. it would be common to refer to one definition for one use and another for a different use. the important thing we look at is how we would process the application. the chapter facility we will process as a child care facility in planning code. we will not process it as something else. we will not process it as a social service. i think that is an important part to make. this is a code compliant project. we did review it against the requirements of the planning code for the 1,000 foot requirement. we did not find that there were any facilities with of the defis that are prohibited in

president peterson: mr. sanchez, if i can go back to 790, section b, tommy how a community facility that primarily serves persons under 18 years of age is not a day care? >> excuse me? president peterson: you know the language. a secondary school or community facility that primarily serves persons under 18 years of age. >> 790.141 section b? president peterson: it is the latter part, the following the language concerning schools. or secondary school, public or private, or community -- >> we have a separate and specific definition for child care. there is no reference in the code anywhere to community facility. president peterson: what is the definition of a community facility that primarily serves persons under 18 years of age? >> would look under the assembly and social service. the community facility and recreation building -- it meets the definition of social service. it is included in that. but by the definition as a social service, not a child care facility, under 790.50a. i can put it on the overhead a

the presiding officer is board president tanya peterson. joining her are commissioners garcia, fung, and hwang. we expect commissioner goh momentarily. i wonder if ms. young is here, if she could raise her hand. i want to let the audience know we have translation device is here for anyone who needs translation services. i will ask again and see if she arrived and can help to translate that message and to set of the headphones. sitting to my left is the deputy city attorney. she will provide the board with any needed legal advice this evening. in the front row, we have representatives from some of the city departments you'll be hearing from this evening. we have senior building inspector joe duffey representing the department of building inspection. scott sanchez, the building administrator, is here representing the planning department and planning commission. jarvus murrais murray is represg the transportation department. john hwang represents st. use and mapping. the board's legal assistant is the boards except to director. >> the board re

president peterson: thank you. next speaker, please? >> hello, commissioners. and a commentator on a chinese radio station. for several days, we have received several calls. a lot of the chinese people call and and are concerned about the mcd and the sunset area. not even one caller said i needed because i have pain. a lot of the people say they are suffering, but they have no problem traveling from sunset to other areas. transportation is not a big issue. other speakers say they have free delivery. this problem is solved. how about our problem? most of the people, not the sunset residents, they are not angry people. they're concerned about the next generation, con just concerned e next generation, the community. the other side is different. the trek to indoctrinate the next generation, saying marijuana is ok. "it is just a pain killer. it is good to try." president peterson: thank you. next speaker, please step forward. >> my name is andrew happened. i support the cannabis dispensary and what greg is trying to do.

president peterson: thank you. commissioner garcia: you have some control over when they are pruned. are you saying otherwise? >> we are talking about areas that hang over the street. commissioner garcia: i understand that. you feel you have the right to prune that? >> this is a very large tree, in pruning -- and pruning it would require us to hire someone. commissioner garcia: let me ask you a different question. and it seems as though i remember having read in the papers use a minute that you and your wife are willing to share in the expense of the annual inspections and prunings, is that right? >> we are willing to because we believe in the safety of this street after the investigation that we have taken under our expense, we are willing to do the annual inspections, splitting the cost with the o'connors. we are willing to split the cost of the initial pruning, which our arborist saysç the largest, and it is also that the city arborist says it may be only one needs four years. commissioner garcia: thank you. pre

president peterson: thank you. we can hear from the permit holders now. >> i am the permit holder, sam ball, at want to introduce my family. -- and i want to introduce my family. this is my wife, my son, my daughter. these are my parents, who are the co-owners of the house. and this is our attorney. >> good evening. the appellants have waited until $130,000 in hard and soft costs, 40% of the way through to completion before filing this appeal. at the could've been filed when they file their appeal of the revision for the. what appealed. that have provided no good reason as to why they did not do this at the same time. my clients did not have to do neighborhood notification for their first permit but they did anyway and handed mr. soto behind us, who was a carpenter, a full 11 by 18 planned months before the issuance of the first permit. we believe that mr. soto, a carpenter, should have been able to read those plants. you do not need to have the permit before you tonight, the permit their request, to render the dec

president peterson: thank you. >> thank you. president peterson: mr. sanchez? >> thank you, scott sanchez, planning department's staff. this evening i am lucky to be joined by the planner, who is involved and the legislation that led up to the requirements that we have, developed in 2005. if there are issues about the intent, it maybe he can address those. there were questions that came up during the testimony. i will jump around a little bit. bear with me. i want to begin with a procedural background of the application. the property is located at 2139 taraval street, between 31st and 32nd streets. the building is a mixed use building, built in 1924. that has a small retail presence at the front, and that is where the subject mcd would be located. it has one dwelling unit at the rear. bmc -- the mc-2 zoning district is principally permitted use. people like to throw around the term as of rights. there is a discretionary review, of course. the subject application, the bill to permit application was submitted at the end of december of last year. they submitted th

president peterson: we will take a short break. >> ok president peterson: we are ready to resume theeeting of the san francisco board of appeals. please call item six? >> calling item 6, appeal number 10-099, academy of art university forces zoning administrator. property is at 460 townsend street. it is the appealing of a notice of violation and penalty dated august 25, 2010, regarding the operation of an unauthorized educational use at the subject property. president peterson: thank you. you have seven minutes. >> hello. my name is david cincotta, and i am here on behalf of the academy of art university. the zoning administrator has determined that because we don't have an institutional master plan or conditional use permit for for under 60 townsend, that the academy is occupying the building illegally. what am i asking you to do? what i believe -- as i have said in my papers, we have an institutional master plan, and the department has not wanted to recognize it. i'm not going to stand here and tell you that we have a conditional use permit. we do not. but we have been unable to h

president peterson: do i need findings to come? commissioner ungfung: would we say this predates and becomes a legal non-conforming? president peterson: very well said. vice-president goh: just three votes? >> it would take three votes for the motion to pass. if there were two votes and no additional motion, it is a matter of law. vice-president goh: i am trying to decide whether i can say in my undecided place. i think i can. commissioner garcia: this is about upholding the revision permits? >> that is what is before you. commissioner garcia: we uphold that. >> the stop work order is not before you. what is before you is this revision permit. the motion that is on the floor right now would deny the appeal and upheld the permit. commissioner garcia: depending on what the vote is, the planning department could rescind its own stop order -- stop work order? >> got sanchez, planning department. if the board finds it is a legal non-complying structure, the department would rescind the stop work order because we would have nothing to st

president peterson: thank you. we can hear from the permit holders now. >> commissioners, you of a motion -- have a notion. >> our presentation is in the form of a video. >> we urge you to not a discretionary review and to accept this as proposed. >> they purchased the property at 71 granada to remodel it with utmost concern for the neighborhood and the environment. the house is the smallest dwelling on the block. the owners of live in cramped quarters during their 4.5 permit process. in 2006, under the supervision of a senior planner, they began using considerable resources with a plan that was subjected to multiple reviews and procedures. the permit holders started their neighbor outreach early in received support of the entire neighborhood. the land use and housing committee recognize the project and has voted to endorse the project. in 2009, the permit holders were approved for a various decision, and there were notification letters that were sent out by the department. the appellant was the only neighbor to ob

president peterson: we are combining these into one case. we will start with whoever is here to represent caanan tutoring. please step forward. >> go ahead. >> my name is ross moody. i am here to speak on behalf of caanan tutoring service. i am a 20-year resident. i have three kids in public school. i married a native. i was lucky enough to do that. it is working out great. i want to talk about what this appeal is not about. what this appeal is not about is the pros and cons of medical marijuana, medical cannabis. i voted for proposition 215 back in the day. it has been the lot in the state for 20 years. i personally support the right of people to use medical cannabis to assist them in staying healthy. but what this appeal is about is san francisco's policy of where to locate medical cannabis dispensaries. the board of supervisors has seen fit to protect a zone around a medical cannabis dispensary. it really relates to the secondary market for marijuana. marijuana makes medicine, and i am not here to dispute that. but so it does toxic conten