scott sanchez: could you repeat? >> tom, with livable city. >> are you able to answer this question? >> i was talking to the deputy city attorney. commissioner miguel: you have a number of roof signs in san francisco that are there that i consider historic. those firms are no longer in business. the signs remain as part of that structure. would they have to be removed? could they be reused with someone else's name on them? how do we handle those? there are some on mission street as well. >> the would not be allowed to use the sign, but there are historic signed permissions in the planning code that would allow retention. we have vintage signs. there are provisions in the planning code that may allow for protection. commissioner miguel: there are some on mission street that are roof signs, quite large. it has changed in recent years. but the structure is still up there. scott sanchez: either any specific signs that you are thinking of? commissioner miguel: i think the old laughlin brothers sign, and a couple of other

scott sanchez: yes. commissioner miguel: even a change in font? you keep 75 year-old copy or change your sign? scott sanchez: yes. commissioner miguel: truthfully, i think that is pushing it. i think that is really pushing the envelope very, very much. if you change the name, if you change the business, as i discussed before, that is one thing. but just changing the modernization, perhaps color, that sort of thing -- that, to me, is pushing the envelope. i think that is incorrect, very truthfully. the other thing, the last line -- the department says the provision should exempt temporary signs for events, such as embarcadero market. i agree with the department on that. and want to make sure in the same manner there is on political science their responsibility in timeliness for removal. that should be in there. -- political signs, their responsibility in timeliness for removal. that was true of political science. four elections down , those are still up there. -- four elections down the line, those are still up there. commissioner moore: temporary

those companies -- scott sanchez: like a car-share program? commissioner borden: they make available these bicycles. the company pays for it or their employee does. they can take the bicycle overnight from the hotel to their home and bring it back for their work shift. just so you know, that does exist. i do not know how you can force that. i do not know if it makes it more complicated. president fong: any other general overall comments? commissioner miguel: i was going to make a motion. i would move the department recommendations with two specific comments. one on the schenic sp -- scenic special sign district, that time and enforcemetnt be covered. and maybe refer to political science for consistency. the other -- i quote from your summary. in the scientific natural life -- the sign's natural life, i think that is such a nebulous phrase that i do not know how you would deal with it. i do not know, trying to think quickly on it, how else you might defy it. however, i do feel that the comments of the zoning administrator, which i appreciate --

scott sanchez is here. he is the zoning administrator. he is representing the planning department and the planning commission. we are joined by joseph duffey, the senior building inspector representing the department of a building inspection. and john hwwang representing the department of public works and mapping. at this time, if you could go over the board meeting guidelines. >> the board requests that you turn off all phones and pagers so they will not disturb the proceedings. please carry on conversations in the hallway. the rules of presentation are as follows -- the appellant, permit holders, and department representatives each have seven minutes to present their cases and three minutes for rebuttals. people affiliated must include the comments within the seven or three-minute periods. those not affiliated will have three minutes to address the board without rebuttal. to assist the board in after preparation of minutes, members of the public who wish to speak are asked, but not required, to submit a speaker card when you come to spe

>> scott sanchez, planning department. just a few notes. no neighborhood notification is required to remove and a legal unit. records indicate that this is a two-family dwellings. the map indicates it is a two- family dwellings. i am not aware of any information that establishes it legally as three units. a third unit could not be legalized at this time. maybe mr. duffy has additional information about the past records, but that is what we have. additionally, the permit holders briefed there was some mention of the use as an office. just to be clear, the use of this office independent of a dwelling unit would be illegal. it would be a separate commercial use. you are about to have a home office as part of an accessory to a dwelling unit, but not separate from a dwelling unit. i am available for any questions. >> i do not know that you can straighten this out for me, but in exhibit b, i assume this would be the permit holders brief, it appears as though there are six units in this building? and the tenant has the right of first refusal? i do

and we have scott sanchez. he is also representing the planning commission and joseph duffy. if you could go over the meeting guidelines and to conduct the swearing in process. >> the board request you turn off all phones and pagers. please carry on conversations in a hallway. appellants, molders, and representatives each have seven minutes to present their cases and three minutes for robot of the reagan people must conclude within the seven minutes and three minutes. people who not affiliated have up to 3 minutes to speak. members of the public who wish to speak are asked not required to present a speaker cards or business card when you come up to speak. speaker cards and pens are available. the board also welcomes comments and suggestions. there are customer satisfaction forms as well. if you have questions about requesting a rehearing, please into board staff during the break or after the meeting or call the office tomorrow morning aboard office is located at 1650 mission street. this is broadcast live on san francisco government television, cable channel 78, and the bees

scott sanchez is here, the zoning administrator, and john quan is here representing the department of works. and we are joined by the san francisco entertainment commission appeared at this time, i will go over the boards guidelines and conduct the swearing in process. the board conducts that you turn off all electronic devices. please carry on conversations in the hallway. appellant, permit holders, and department respondents each have seven minutes to present their case, and three minutes for rebuttal. people affiliated with these parties must include their comments in these seven-minute or three-minute time frames. members of the public -- have three minutes to address the board and no rebuttal. you are not required to submit a speaker cards or board card when you come up to speak. speaker cards are available on the left of the podium. the board welcomes your comments and suggestions and their satisfaction survey cards on the podium for your convenience. if you have any questions about requesting the board's rules or hearing schedules, please speak to staff the after the meeting or

if this is correct, scott sanchez was very clear, the zoning administrator, that the project complieswith the current process. everything in this project past -- passed their concerns. there was no foul play. obviously, about the department did a good job -- i thought the department did a good job rectifying coming to explain to us. we had a thick of year in operational, and obviously, the director talked about the stance. you process almost 52,000 permits a year based on the information i have been given. a human error has been made here. from that, all this has come from it. i think it is important that when we do find problems that the department addresses those problems and makes them right. that is what has happened here. i want to commend the department for doing a very thorough job and making sure everything was addressed that was offered up here today from the appellant. >> i just have one more question, maybe to the appellant -- why were these appeals not done to the board of appeals where generally building permits -- >> perfect question. i notice a permit issuance for major

scott sanchez: i do not have much to add. the project is principally permitted and compliant. non-neighborhood notification is required. the appellant property is located to the south. given the location of the south, they would not feature any direct sunlight into that like well. -- light well. the deck is set back from the property line and matches with the light well. when they step back a few feet from the railing, he will not have a direct line into the adjacent property. the appellant has created concerns about privacy, about the potential impact of the grille. i did not even know if there is a requirement to show the gril ol on there. if it were someone to bring a charcoal grill onto the roof, i do not know that would need to be shown on any plan. these are items for the board to consider in your decision making tonight. i am available for any questions. thank you. >> thank you. mr. duffy? >> i do not have much to add either. the real hyper code would be 42 inches high. -- the rail height per code would be 42 inches high. i do not see a problem with the gas grill. i thi

we're talking about laurel curve near scotts valley. kris sanchez joins us now. what's the plan? >> reporter: well, raj, chances are if you drive highway 17 you probably white knuckle it around laurel curve because it is a very smooth stretch of road and it's tempting to go a little too fast. it's downhill and there's no guardrail separating you from oncoming traffic. some of those things are going to change this week. on any given day as many as 65,000 drivers pass laurel road on highway 17, some of them don't make it past this curve. just friday a 54-year-old man from brentwood died here when he lost control in the rain and smashed into a driver going in the opposite direction. california highway patrol officer sarah jackson drove us along that route. >> where they would normally hit the center divide they're coming through and having head-on collisions with northbound traffic. >> reporter: laurel curve accounts for one in three crashes on highway 17. they have resisted calls for a guardrail here citing access to laurel road which may not serve the greater good. in a mile and a