it doesn't extend the exception to l.c.u.s. >> commissioner santacana: it doesn't not extend it, either. when the code talks about l.c.u.s, it talks about them almost like an appendage of l.c.s. when we talk about neighborhood districts, we talk about l.c.u.s, and sometimes it's not clear which is which. does anyone have the e-mail from supervisor safai when he rendered his interpretation of the law? >> i don't have that with me, no. >> commissioner honda: no disrespect to our former building inspector, corey teague, but i'm pretty sure i'm the only commissioner on this board that was a small business owner for a very long time, and in the outer sunset for a very long time. what's confusing to me, and what's the core issue, it's the operating language and the conflicting inconsistency of how this was written. because if you look, and you read through the n.c. 1, which is something 186, then, you get into ahsha's and katy's language. it's very confusing. and as a small business owner, for me, for a very long time and real estate and small developer, i found it difficult to sort through m

>> commissioner santacana: i think that i'm a little closer to commissioner honda. the permit is not before us, any way. the question is should we grant an exposure variance or not, which is a de novo question, and my feeling is planning is standing by their original decision but perhaps with not a whole lot of oomph. >> commissioner honda: oomph. you don't have a whole lot of oomph, scott, tonight, just to let you know. >> commissioner santacana: there's seasons, that doesn't really answer the daylight question for me, as well, but i see enough to make the five findings. >> president swig: i'm going to end what i'm going to say, asking commissioner honda a question, which is what would frank say? >> commissioner honda: we'll call him. he's off on wednesday nights. i've got his number. >> president swig: yeah, because our esteemed former member, frank fung was very, very circumspect -- >> commissioner honda: and then he went to the dark side. >> president swig: of granting variances. the big issue seems to be the one. that's what the z.a. is hanging his hat on as fa

. >> commissioner santacana: sir, i noticed you mentioned businesses there, as well. there's a sandwich shop there? >> there's a sandwich shop on the block down, but another block, there's a better one with super awesome sandwiches. >> commissioner honda: next speaker. good evening and welcome. >> good evening. thank you. san francisco is my home. it's where i've lived longer than anywhere else. a big part of what keeps me in this city is the food community that lives here and how they show up and how they conceptualize and think about their city. i've had the pleasure of knowing dennis and monica through the food and wine industry and in the community specifically in their outer sunset beloved neighborhood. it is clear that the intention of the small business attraction ordinance program was passed precisely to eliminate undue burdens for businesses and neighbors themselves such as monica, dennis, and their project. as a member of the local food community of san francisco, i also appeal you, just on behalf of the city and vibrancy of the city that i live in, but also

honda: yeah. >> commissioner santacana: i think i would amend the motion to add a second independent ground that the zoning administrator erred in his interpretation of the law based on the evidence given. >> president swig: i'm more comfortable with that. thank you very much. >> commissioner honda: and we are going to have a second bite at this. >> commissioner honda: you've got to call the motion. >> clerk: okay. please make sure i'm accurate. we have a motion from commissioner santacana to grant the appeal and overturn the suspension request on the basis that the z.a.erred in interpreting the planning code based on the interpretation by the planning code this evening. and further, that the zoning administrator acted arbitrarily in his discretion by changing the rules without adequate justification. so on that motion -- [roll call] >> clerk: okay. so that motion carries, and the appeal is granted. so -- [applause] >> clerk: so this concludes the hearing. thank you. . >> good to have you here. welcome. i am the s.f.o. airport director. thank you all for being here. thank you. [ appl

we expect commissioner darryl honda shortry and commissioner eudardo santacana will be abtent tonight. to my left is the legal attorney. at the control is the board's legal assistant katie sullivan and the league process clerk. i am julie rosenberg, the board's executive director. we will be joined by representatives from the city departments that have cases before the board this even. we expect scott sanchez, also representin t

we expect commissioner darryl honda shortry and commissioner eudardo santacana will be abtent tonightft is the legal attorney. at the control is the board's legal assistant katie sullivan and the league process clerk. i am julie rosenberg, the board's executive director.

he is joined by commissioner lazarus, commissioner honda, commissioner santacana and commissioner tanner. he will provide the board with legal advice this evening. i'm julie, the board's executive director. we will be joined by representatives from the city department that has cases before the board. scott sanchez from the planning department is sitting in front. he also representing the planning commission. we have joseph duffy representing the department of building inspection. we have leah from san francisco public works and i believe debra will be present from san francisco public works bureau street use and mapping. the board requests that you turn off or silence your phones and other electronic devices. please carry on conversations in the hallway. the rules of presentation as follows. appellants permit holders and respondents are given seven minutes to present their case and three minutes for he re but thal. rebuttal. members not affiliated with the parties have three minutes to address the board and no rebuttal. they are given three minutes and no rebuttal. to assist the board yo

possibly commissioner santacana. >> i would rather we stick this to the 4th for the continuity of the hearing and hope that something falls out. then we are in january. >> commissioner honda: can a representative for the permit holder come to the podium? the geotech. so what we are suggesting, sir, and i hate to be extremely frank, we don't trust that you are going to get this done in a timely manner to protect the neighboring property. that is just my honest feeling on this. my question here is, we don't want to go through winter here. what we would like to do is at the end of the hearing, you, your client, the next door neighbor, and the representative of the department go in the hallway and hash this out. so that we can make your property safe during the wintertime and that the rains don't effect it and we can assure that the neighboring property owner will be safe as well. what is your timeline to get this work done, is ir? >> this work as soon as they give us the permit, we will proceed right away. it's been delayed -- >> right away is not a time. week, month, days? >> how long w

santacana chime in if he has anything else. >> did you do the construction authority? the 24-hour notice i think is the minimum that's already required. >> i think 48 hour good and because there's been mistrust and that we can build up trust going forward. which i doubt but -- >> so grant the peel on the condition -- >> i want to ask ann. i'll make a comment. okay. i'm going to let the commissioner make the motion. but i'd like to -- i think it's fair that we establish an even playing field here. i want to encourage the project sponsor to understand that we are not picking on him because it's an even playing field. however, our experience here is that many appellants who are vulnerable and renters are vulnerable and people with special conditions are vulnerable. it is fair to say that they come in here scared to death because their lives are potentially impacted. i think there's 12,000 homeless people in the streets in san francisco, many of which have been victims of running out of time, running out of money. so there's a lot of fear in the city. so it's not that to p

so on that motion commissioner santacana. >> aye. >> vice president. >> that motion carries 5-0. and i will -- so we have -- there is no rehearing period for this. so i will contact the permit holder tomorrow regarding sending information on the decision as well as instructions on how to submit revised plans for special conditions permit. thank you. will you get a copy? >> the new plan, new foundation plan. >> that's not what they are submitted at this point. they are going to be the revised plans that were submitted this evening are adopted and that will include a letter from the engineer. so we will be sending that out once we get the letter from the engineer on the plan set. >> got it. thank you so much. >> thank you. >>

we expect commissioner darryl honda shortry and commissioner eudardo santacana will be abtent tonight. to my left is the legal attorney. at the control is the board's legal assistant katie sullivan and the league process clerk. i am julie rosenberg, the board's executive director. we will be joined by representatives from the city departments that have cases before the board this even. we expect scott sanchez, also representing the planning department and valley lopez, deputy city attorney representing the department of public health. the meeting guidelines are as follows. turn off or silence phone and other electronic devices so they will not disturb the proceedings. carry on conversations in the hallway. the rules of presentation are as follows. appellants, permit holders and department responders are each given 7 minutes to present the case and 3 minutes for rebuttal. people affiliated with the parties must include the comments within the seven or three minute periods. members of the public who are not affiliated have three minutes and no rebuttal. please speak into the microphone.

so on that motion commissioner santacana. >> aye. >> vice president. >> that motion carries 5-0. and i will -- so we have -- there is no rehearing period for this. so i will contact the permit holder tomorrow regarding sending information on the decision as well as instructions on how to submit revised plans for special conditions permit. thank you. will you get a copy? >> the new plan, new foundation plan. >> that's not what they are submitted at this point. they are going to be the revised plans that were submitted this evening are adopted and that will include a letter from the engineer. so we will be sending that out once we get the letter from the engineer on the plan set. >> got it. thank you so much. >> thank you. >> we'll have a 15-minute break. we'll about back here about 7:45, please. >> thank you >> we are ready. okay. please be seated. welcome back to the november 6, 2019 meeting of the san francisco board of appealing. we are now on item number 7. this is appeal number 19-085. our mission no eviction versus the planning commission subject property is 344 shortstop 14