SFGTV: San Francisco Government Television
50
50
Jun 13, 2014
06/14
by
SFGTV
tv
eye 50
favorite 0
quote 0
on appeal against a demolition and the appellant talked about the virile refugee agreed with the appellant we had concerns of the accuracy of the review the board to the call of the chair it should be on the docket. the permit holder subsequentially filed a new application in march of 2010 we were working on the zoning that came effective in the last couple of years and performed the environmental review on march 6 and mitigated a declaration for the environmental review for the project and on marine 12 the permit applications were filed two demolition two buildings to be demolished the jurisdiction request only concerns one jurisdiction demolition so not all permits are subject of the jurisdiction request. at least i believe. following that the issuance of the negative declaration mitigated the appellant filled the appeal of the environmental determination. and it also during the time the building application section 312 last summer for thirty days no discretionary review authorization requests the planning commission heard the appeal in october and unanimously denied the appeal subsequen
on appeal against a demolition and the appellant talked about the virile refugee agreed with the appellant we had concerns of the accuracy of the review the board to the call of the chair it should be on the docket. the permit holder subsequentially filed a new application in march of 2010 we were working on the zoning that came effective in the last couple of years and performed the environmental review on march 6 and mitigated a declaration for the environmental review for the project and on...
SFGTV: San Francisco Government Television
50
50
Jun 2, 2014
06/14
by
SFGTV
tv
eye 50
favorite 0
quote 0
. >> colleagues, any questions to the appellant? let me ask if there are members of the public that wish to speak in support of the appellant? >>>♪ sometimes you start feeling lost and so city lowly then you'll find the mass is on your mind because you can't tell where you're at when you don't have a map sometimes you can only think of one thing and it brings though all the lines you'll find 'cow you can't tell where you're at without a city parcel map ♪ >> next speaker. >>> tom gilberti. the president said a couple of -- like to say that this -- everything is on the table. and in this casey would like to see a planning commission that goes to somebody and say, we can't make enough money building 100 yards up in the sky in san francisco and, so, we need to go 200 feet higher in order to make money. i would like to see the planning commission say to that developer, since you can't make money at 350 feet, we don't think you should handle this job at all and go to the owner of the property and say, excuse me, we recommend that you find
. >> colleagues, any questions to the appellant? let me ask if there are members of the public that wish to speak in support of the appellant? >>>♪ sometimes you start feeling lost and so city lowly then you'll find the mass is on your mind because you can't tell where you're at when you don't have a map sometimes you can only think of one thing and it brings though all the lines you'll find 'cow you can't tell where you're at without a city parcel map ♪ >> next...
SFGTV: San Francisco Government Television
60
60
Jun 15, 2014
06/14
by
SFGTV
tv
eye 60
favorite 0
quote 0
we can hear from the permit holder now. >> thank you, mr. johnson for appellant at&t with all due respect to my colleagues who got up and auditor he's got a lot of the facts about the appeal wrong i'm going to attempt to correct the record. at&t employed for a pilot in the vicinity of the neighborhood at&t conducted a box walk as mrs. lee confirmed in her brief she was at the box walk during the box walk mrs. lee identified a couple of locations those locations on the northeast location of gerrero and caesar chavez i'm going to pickup truck up a faithful so the board can look at that. so at&t agreed during the box walking it would send at&t field representative to cite this location to see if it's appropriate. at&t did that. unfortunately, when the field location are person got out there she saw the same thing you see on the screen the appellant proposed two alternative locations one in the back of this heavily trespassed area that's on private property owned by city unfortunately, that's not a technically feasible site for at&t to install our cabinets require 12
we can hear from the permit holder now. >> thank you, mr. johnson for appellant at&t with all due respect to my colleagues who got up and auditor he's got a lot of the facts about the appeal wrong i'm going to attempt to correct the record. at&t employed for a pilot in the vicinity of the neighborhood at&t conducted a box walk as mrs. lee confirmed in her brief she was at the box walk during the box walk mrs. lee identified a couple of locations those locations on the...
SFGTV: San Francisco Government Television
39
39
Jun 18, 2014
06/14
by
SFGTV
tv
eye 39
favorite 0
quote 0
so, i will be voting with the appellants. i expect i'll be voting in the minute art. >> before we continue on, i did want to give appellants an opportunity to do final rebuttal. you have up to three minutes. >> thank you l. i'll just make a couple quick points ~. briefly, the san francisco bicycle coalition had sent a message supporting the appeal to the board of supervisors. please check your e-mails. with regard to the legal arguments that have been presented by the other side, i'd like to address two things. one is that, yes, the statutory exemptions, the question is are they properly invoked. the statutory exemption has specific readings which i'll read from. [speaker not understood] an exemption under this statutory exemption is claimed, setting forth with specificity, [speaker not understood], which is the exemption code that we're looking at. and the question there is have the agencies done so? well, attachment a says it has an itemized list that is being exempt. the attachment a to the budget coffers only revenue sourc
so, i will be voting with the appellants. i expect i'll be voting in the minute art. >> before we continue on, i did want to give appellants an opportunity to do final rebuttal. you have up to three minutes. >> thank you l. i'll just make a couple quick points ~. briefly, the san francisco bicycle coalition had sent a message supporting the appeal to the board of supervisors. please check your e-mails. with regard to the legal arguments that have been presented by the other side,...
SFGTV: San Francisco Government Television
48
48
Jun 17, 2014
06/14
by
SFGTV
tv
eye 48
favorite 0
quote 0
we will then take public comment from individuals speaking on behalf of the appellants. each speaker will have two minutes to present. we will then hear ha from the planning department who will have 10 minutes to describe the ground for the certification of the e-i-r. we will have someone speaking on behalf of the real party in interest. then appellants will have three minutes for rebuttal. colleague, any questions? seeing none, i will ask appellant to make your initial presentation. >> thank you, mr. president, members of the board. i'm cathy supervisor farrell and i represent san franciscans for livable neighborhoods in this appeal. we're here because the superior court found that the city violated the requirements of the california environmental quality act because the e-i-r's discussion of alternatives was conclusory and unsupported by fact and the findings rejecting alternatives were conclusory and unsupported by fact. the court set aside the certification of the e-i-r and approval of policies with potential for physical environmental impact. and the city -- excuse m
we will then take public comment from individuals speaking on behalf of the appellants. each speaker will have two minutes to present. we will then hear ha from the planning department who will have 10 minutes to describe the ground for the certification of the e-i-r. we will have someone speaking on behalf of the real party in interest. then appellants will have three minutes for rebuttal. colleague, any questions? seeing none, i will ask appellant to make your initial presentation. >>...
SFGTV: San Francisco Government Television
68
68
Jun 2, 2014
06/14
by
SFGTV
tv
eye 68
favorite 0
quote 0
colleagues, any questions he to the appellant? if there are any members of the public that wish to speak on behalf of the appellant, please step up. >>> commissioners, ray [speaker not understood], san francisco open government. i think we need to come to some sense of reality regarding automobiles and parking in this city. you can't keep cutting spaces from residential areas and expect the city to be in any way habitable. many of the apartments that are in this city right now, in fact, a vast majority of them have no parking and, therefore, the residents are relying on street parking at all times. i myself know what it is like to come home from work at 11 o'clock at night and have to drive around 18 blocks to find a space where i leave my car knowing that it's in an area now where i'm going to probably come back and find my window smashed out. i really have a hard time understanding why anybody would want to build a building like this and not increase its long-term value by having parking. having parking in the building makes that
colleagues, any questions he to the appellant? if there are any members of the public that wish to speak on behalf of the appellant, please step up. >>> commissioners, ray [speaker not understood], san francisco open government. i think we need to come to some sense of reality regarding automobiles and parking in this city. you can't keep cutting spaces from residential areas and expect the city to be in any way habitable. many of the apartments that are in this city right now, in...
SFGTV: San Francisco Government Television
65
65
Jun 27, 2014
06/14
by
SFGTV
tv
eye 65
favorite 0
quote 0
the board's rusev of presentation are as follows. appellants, permit holders and department representatives each have 7 minutes to present their cases and three minutes for rebuttals. people affiliated with these parties must include their comments within the 7 or 3-minute periods. members of the public who are not affiliated with the parties have up to three minutes each to address the board, but no rebuttals. to assist the board in the accurate preparation of minutes, members of the public who wish to speak on an item are asked, but not required, to submit a speaker card or business card to staff when you come up to the podium. speaker cards and pens are available on the left side of the podium. the board also welcomeses your comments and suggestions. there are customer satisfaction survey forms on the left side of the podium. if you have questions about requesting a rehearing, board rules or hearing schedules, please speak to board staff during the break or after the meeting or call the board office tomorrow morning. the board office is loca
the board's rusev of presentation are as follows. appellants, permit holders and department representatives each have 7 minutes to present their cases and three minutes for rebuttals. people affiliated with these parties must include their comments within the 7 or 3-minute periods. members of the public who are not affiliated with the parties have up to three minutes each to address the board, but no rebuttals. to assist the board in the accurate preparation of minutes, members of the public...
SFGTV: San Francisco Government Television
50
50
Jun 6, 2014
06/14
by
SFGTV
tv
eye 50
favorite 0
quote 0
because the appellants have the burden on this matter, we ask that you deny this request. thank you, we are available for questions. >> thank you, ms. short, do you have anything to add? no. is there any public comment on this item? seeing none, commissioners, the matter is yours. >> well, since a lot of this probably hinges on my opinion, i think i would like to have some discussion with my fellow commissioners about their view on the procedural error and whether that meets the standard for a rehearing request. >> i have my own opinion, but just want to be informed by other people's thoughts. >> we have made the comment in enumerable times that should a missing members vote affect that we would ask for a continuance our self. that is not a formal thing but we've said it many many times. >> we have consistently applied that practice. it is as commissioner fung indicates, i think it's a rule that we have that is informal rather than a formal policy, but it is practiced. i'm not sure during a course of the time that i have been on the board that we've ever diverged. we follo
because the appellants have the burden on this matter, we ask that you deny this request. thank you, we are available for questions. >> thank you, ms. short, do you have anything to add? no. is there any public comment on this item? seeing none, commissioners, the matter is yours. >> well, since a lot of this probably hinges on my opinion, i think i would like to have some discussion with my fellow commissioners about their view on the procedural error and whether that meets the...
SFGTV: San Francisco Government Television
39
39
Jun 28, 2014
06/14
by
SFGTV
tv
eye 39
favorite 0
quote 0
if the appellant is not here then we'll precede was we typically do with the appellant not being here any members of the public wish to speak on behalf of the appellant? any city staffers and the parties may speak. seeing none, if any of the public wishes to speak on behalf of seeing none. the appellant is not here with that this hearing is heard and finally. it's in the hands of the board i want to adapt item 53 and 54 >> seconded by supervisor breed. colleagues let's take roll call >> supervisor chiu. supervisor cohen. supervisor farrell. supervisor kim. supervisor mar. supervisor tang. supervisor wiener. supervisor yee. supervisor avalos. supervisor breed. supervisor campos. there are 11 i's. the motion is approved item 55 and 56. the board of supervisors will convene a public hearing to consider objections to a report of assessment costs the subject of the resolution contained in item 56 for the repair of blight prospers through the sidewalk abatement program >> let's here from our dpw staffer. >> i'm robert quan with the dictionary and the repairs made and invoiced by city for th
if the appellant is not here then we'll precede was we typically do with the appellant not being here any members of the public wish to speak on behalf of the appellant? any city staffers and the parties may speak. seeing none, if any of the public wishes to speak on behalf of seeing none. the appellant is not here with that this hearing is heard and finally. it's in the hands of the board i want to adapt item 53 and 54 >> seconded by supervisor breed. colleagues let's take roll call...
SFGTV: San Francisco Government Television
48
48
Jun 21, 2014
06/14
by
SFGTV
tv
eye 48
favorite 0
quote 0
. >> i think the issues were addressed by the appellant in this case. with respect to the changes of the name and the color or branding of the product and the signage i think that's the language. i think i would say that is not the failure to engage and the desire to get around the position it's a big problem and subsequential issue, however, i think that the occur ventilation of a process in place we found that was formula retail. it's something we should and can stand by simply trying to get around that through a signage change shouldn't stand i disagree >> okay. i think technically i don't think the zoning administrator record technically. but i don't feel like i have enough information as to the contrary criteria to make a determination about formula retail i agree with commissioner fung that perhaps those are concerns that are valid but not technically part of the legislation as it stands or of the formula retail statute regulation as it now stands there's legislation preponderance of the evidence maybe to clarify or expand that but we have to look
. >> i think the issues were addressed by the appellant in this case. with respect to the changes of the name and the color or branding of the product and the signage i think that's the language. i think i would say that is not the failure to engage and the desire to get around the position it's a big problem and subsequential issue, however, i think that the occur ventilation of a process in place we found that was formula retail. it's something we should and can stand by simply trying...
SFGTV: San Francisco Government Television
54
54
Jun 2, 2014
06/14
by
SFGTV
tv
eye 54
favorite 0
quote 0
i'm tom lippe, i represent the appellants. re here now because the tentative subdivision maps, both the nonvesting ones, project 7 65 and the vesting map under project 79 70 were not approved last summer ~ when this board and other agencies of the city approved a whole bunch of approvals for the 706 mission street project. so, the planning zone agree on one point. those cited in support of this pa peel, the board has already seen. this board has an opportunity to make a different decision on a number of those issues. there are also a few new issues. first of all, the vesting map, you can't approve that unless the other map is approved first because the vesting map a tents to subdivide a parcel that doesn't exist yet. and that's in the previous number on the project number is 4, 79 69. a second issue that's new is that if the e-i-r which is in litigation at this moment on the approval issue last summer is found to be inadequate under c-e-q-a, this neir that you would be basing the decision to approve these parcel maps would also
i'm tom lippe, i represent the appellants. re here now because the tentative subdivision maps, both the nonvesting ones, project 7 65 and the vesting map under project 79 70 were not approved last summer ~ when this board and other agencies of the city approved a whole bunch of approvals for the 706 mission street project. so, the planning zone agree on one point. those cited in support of this pa peel, the board has already seen. this board has an opportunity to make a different decision on a...
SFGTV: San Francisco Government Television
47
47
Jun 15, 2014
06/14
by
SFGTV
tv
eye 47
favorite 0
quote 0
so when they went up the wall the leaning of the building meant they suddenly had a problem >> the appellantsuilding. >> yes. possibly that's one of the photographs i can see that on top of the trim in san francisco there's a settlement this lean. when you allow for the frame at the bottom as you go up urge to go build it out of the plump or hit the lean of the building. i'm not sure how they started off on the wrong 2009 foot's there was the issue of a lot of the buildings in san francisco are flashed off each other where you have a picture tatdz wall sometimes, it's not to code but stops a lot of like rain and water problems getting in so that flashing was caught from working at dbi we encourage i know planning don't is the preapplication stuff meeting with people and neighbors talking if you're going to build a building having the discussion with the neighbors is also good something is going to leak if you don't take care of that that's common courtesy dbi didn't want to get involved but certainly the neighbors. all of those things happened now we're stuck with complaints filed with dbi an
so when they went up the wall the leaning of the building meant they suddenly had a problem >> the appellantsuilding. >> yes. possibly that's one of the photographs i can see that on top of the trim in san francisco there's a settlement this lean. when you allow for the frame at the bottom as you go up urge to go build it out of the plump or hit the lean of the building. i'm not sure how they started off on the wrong 2009 foot's there was the issue of a lot of the buildings in san...
SFGTV: San Francisco Government Television
55
55
Jun 18, 2014
06/14
by
SFGTV
tv
eye 55
favorite 0
quote 0
thank you. >> colleagues, any questions to the appellants? all right. at this time why don't we hear from members of the public that support the appellants. you have up to two minutes each. please step up. >>> good afternoon, supervisors. i'm peter straus and i'm here with the transit riders union. i think supervisor wiener raised a number of interesting points which i hadn't thought about, but i think a key issue here is whether, in fact, there is balance in the budget achieved or whether there is still a long-term deficit that needs to be addressed. i think one of the issues here, it's been alleged the suspension of sunday metering from c-e-q-a and substituting additional funds, there is no net impact. i think there's still sort of analogous to how you look at global warming. if we look at the over warming in 2015, while there's no massive flooding in 2015, but you can't allege that global warming does not have environmental effects because there is a long-term problem that has not been addressed and the issue here is that this represents the sunday me
thank you. >> colleagues, any questions to the appellants? all right. at this time why don't we hear from members of the public that support the appellants. you have up to two minutes each. please step up. >>> good afternoon, supervisors. i'm peter straus and i'm here with the transit riders union. i think supervisor wiener raised a number of interesting points which i hadn't thought about, but i think a key issue here is whether, in fact, there is balance in the budget achieved...
SFGTV: San Francisco Government Television
44
44
Jun 18, 2014
06/14
by
SFGTV
tv
eye 44
favorite 0
quote 0
as discussed in detail in the planning department's written response, the appellants' main assertion is the e-i-r should have analyzed additional alternatives to the proposed project. [speaker not understood] no unlimited area plan or no unlimited area planning processes project, the june draft of the 2009 housing alternative and various others. as articulated in our written response, the san francisco superior court specifically found the previous e-i-r [speaker not understood] a reasonable range of alternative. thus it does not require an additional alternative. several many [speaker not understood] have already been considered in the e-i-r but were rejected for other reasons as specified in that document. in general, the alternatives recommended by the appellant either would not meet the objectives of the proposed project, would be infeasible, would not avoid or substantially lessen any significant effect of the project or would not add any meaningful solution to the environmental analysis. thus the planning department continues to find that the e-i-r that was certified for the pro
as discussed in detail in the planning department's written response, the appellants' main assertion is the e-i-r should have analyzed additional alternatives to the proposed project. [speaker not understood] no unlimited area plan or no unlimited area planning processes project, the june draft of the 2009 housing alternative and various others. as articulated in our written response, the san francisco superior court specifically found the previous e-i-r [speaker not understood] a reasonable...
SFGTV: San Francisco Government Television
44
44
Jun 14, 2014
06/14
by
SFGTV
tv
eye 44
favorite 0
quote 0
i'm carol i'm one of the appellants of the appeal. we are asking that the building permit granted to the gentleman be suspended or revoked because the permit didn't encompass the encroachment and doesn't identify the problems. first, we building that the encroachment is one of a quarter inches not thee quarters of on inch which is the correction we have a boundary survey it shows a one and quarter inch encroachment. additionally the picture space between the two buildings there was a two inch space is gone it's been consumed your that looking at over 3 inches of encroachment. second there are other serious violations we have that were caused by the flying permit that are the elimination of the separation one way or the other wall and the fire separation ignoring property lines separation and building over the property and nailing their wall to our wall and adding dead and live loads to our walls the new third store is too close to our chimney we're required to modify our home and the elevation plans were not submitted to the city it s
i'm carol i'm one of the appellants of the appeal. we are asking that the building permit granted to the gentleman be suspended or revoked because the permit didn't encompass the encroachment and doesn't identify the problems. first, we building that the encroachment is one of a quarter inches not thee quarters of on inch which is the correction we have a boundary survey it shows a one and quarter inch encroachment. additionally the picture space between the two buildings there was a two inch...
SFGTV: San Francisco Government Television
42
42
Jun 23, 2014
06/14
by
SFGTV
tv
eye 42
favorite 0
quote 0
. >> any other member of the public wish to speak in support of the appellants? okay, at this time why don't we now hear from the department. >> thank you, supervisors. john ram, planning director. i will briefly just make a few comments and turn it over to staff to talk about the specifics of the appeal. we're here today to ask you to reject this current appeal on the e-i-r for the housing element and to readopt the 2009 housing element to remedy the lawsuits by san franciscans for livable neighborhoods, an association of neighborhood groups who challenged both the 2004 and 2009 housing element e-i-r and the adoption of the '09 element in san francisco superior court. your actions today to reject the appeal will allow the adoption of the 2009 element and allow many projects and programs to move forward. briefly the housing element is a required element of the city's plan. general plan elements to remind us all are high-level policy documents and guides. they are not regulatory actions for specific projects. we use the housing element as a city family directing de
. >> any other member of the public wish to speak in support of the appellants? okay, at this time why don't we now hear from the department. >> thank you, supervisors. john ram, planning director. i will briefly just make a few comments and turn it over to staff to talk about the specifics of the appeal. we're here today to ask you to reject this current appeal on the e-i-r for the housing element and to readopt the 2009 housing element to remedy the lawsuits by san franciscans for...
SFGTV: San Francisco Government Television
43
43
Jun 15, 2014
06/14
by
SFGTV
tv
eye 43
favorite 0
quote 0
was conducted and the appellant filed a discretionary review permit on that application it's my understanding think the dr requester the materials he stated his opposition to the roof-deck and proposed elimination i quote the elimination felt roof-deck is for cold temperatures and because of noise and partying and fire pits that could further block light the planning commission concerned those arguments and took discretionary review they asked for the property line be secured to provide privacy. >> what's the date. >> january 30th was 2013 i'm sorry. >> 12 and january 24th of analyzing was the dr holding and the building permit was subsequentially otherwise on july 8, 2013, that was a complaint a building inspector went out and the building permit was filed it was approved by our staff that reviewed it and the dr decision said it come forward and the proposed changes to the roof-deck didn'ty my new notification every change requires a revision but that didn't require a new notice and this permit was issued on february 21st before this board. i did not see a 2010 permit on file i don't know wh
was conducted and the appellant filed a discretionary review permit on that application it's my understanding think the dr requester the materials he stated his opposition to the roof-deck and proposed elimination i quote the elimination felt roof-deck is for cold temperatures and because of noise and partying and fire pits that could further block light the planning commission concerned those arguments and took discretionary review they asked for the property line be secured to provide...
SFGTV: San Francisco Government Television
42
42
Jun 21, 2014
06/14
by
SFGTV
tv
eye 42
favorite 0
quote 0
. >> did that work for you and how about the appellant court gin 25th? >> (inaudible). >> yes. we'll madam director we'll talk about the briefing schedule. >> any additional documents submitted will be due thursday prior to the hearing and, of course, to summit to not only the board but to the appellant and each other; right? on the same day. >> okay. >> okay. >> any other verifications. >> unless you want to put a page limit. >> mr. pacheco. >> we have to continue this motivator until june 22nd - 25th excuse me. the public hearing has been held to allow time for the public holder to summit the graphics of the alternative sites. >> if the predicament holder and the department as or a department okay. or a dpw and those inhabits are due one thursday prior to the hearing. commissioner fung. commissioner hurtado the president is absent. commissioner honda thank you the vote is 4 to zero it's continued until june 25th thank you >> we're going to take >> welcome to the wednesday, june 11, 2014, of the san francisco board of appeals. item no. 7 has been withdrawn appeal number next ro
. >> did that work for you and how about the appellant court gin 25th? >> (inaudible). >> yes. we'll madam director we'll talk about the briefing schedule. >> any additional documents submitted will be due thursday prior to the hearing and, of course, to summit to not only the board but to the appellant and each other; right? on the same day. >> okay. >> okay. >> any other verifications. >> unless you want to put a page limit. >> mr....
SFGTV: San Francisco Government Television
62
62
Jun 27, 2014
06/14
by
SFGTV
tv
eye 62
favorite 0
quote 0
with that, the appellant or appellant's attorney. you have 7 minutes to present your case. >>> thank you. good evening. my name is alex merchant. i am the attorney for appellant jason fisher. mr. fisher is the tenant in the property. the property is a single-family home that has an unpermitted bedroom that was added to the bottom floor. i don't know when it was added. its was added prior to mr. fisher's tenancy. he moved in in approximately 2003. at the time he occupied one of the bedrooms in the upper floors. in 2007, with the owner's permission, he moved into the bedroom in the bottom floor. the owner had full knowledge that mr. fisher was occupying this room. he had full knowledge in 2003 when the tenants moved into the property that they were going to be occupying this room. that's contrary to the -- mr. santiago's statement, the statement in opposition to this appeal says he had no idea that mr. fisher was moving into this room and that mr. fisher converted it himself. that's simply not true. if this permit is issued, mr. fisher
with that, the appellant or appellant's attorney. you have 7 minutes to present your case. >>> thank you. good evening. my name is alex merchant. i am the attorney for appellant jason fisher. mr. fisher is the tenant in the property. the property is a single-family home that has an unpermitted bedroom that was added to the bottom floor. i don't know when it was added. its was added prior to mr. fisher's tenancy. he moved in in approximately 2003. at the time he occupied one of the...
SFGTV: San Francisco Government Television
73
73
Jun 23, 2014
06/14
by
SFGTV
tv
eye 73
favorite 0
quote 0
secondly, the appellants [speaker not understood]. the department responded to this concern in our submittal. mta adopted a resolution with written findings that fees, fares, rates and charges in attachment a are necessary to meet mta operating expenses including employee wages and benefits, or to purchase and lease essential supplies and material. the supplemental letter contends it is not specific enough to clearly indicate that the elimination of sunday meters was part of the budget. mta addressed this in a written response to the appeal and to reiterate, these findings satisfy the requirements for findings under c-e-q-a. the third concern, it does not itemize elimination of sunday parking and is thus inadequate. the department's response to this concern is that the findings made apply to the entire 2015-2016 operating and capital budget. attachment a, the revenue sources only. for sunday parking will not be listed, but with revenue sources because clearly no revenue is generated from the parking. even though sunday parking results
secondly, the appellants [speaker not understood]. the department responded to this concern in our submittal. mta adopted a resolution with written findings that fees, fares, rates and charges in attachment a are necessary to meet mta operating expenses including employee wages and benefits, or to purchase and lease essential supplies and material. the supplemental letter contends it is not specific enough to clearly indicate that the elimination of sunday meters was part of the budget. mta...
SFGTV: San Francisco Government Television
49
49
Jun 23, 2014
06/14
by
SFGTV
tv
eye 49
favorite 0
quote 0
we'll hear from the appellants who will describe the grounds for the appeal. we will then hear public comment from individuals speaking on behalf of the appellants. each speaker will have up to two minutes. we'll then hear from the sfmta and the planning department who will have up to 10 minutes to describe the grounds for their determination that this project is exempt from environmental review. we'll then hear from individuals speaking on behalf of the project sponsor and each member of the public will have up to two minutes to present. finally the appellant will have up to three minutes for arguments and rebuttal. why don't we proceed to the appellants. >> good morning, mr. president, supervisors. my name is [speaker not understood], transit riders system and [speaker not understood]. thank you for hearing our appeal. i know that c-e-q-a issues are not always a favorite and that transit decision are always difficult, but i hope i can enlighten you as to some of the factors and reasons why we brought this appeal and why the decision to be overturned. i'll be
we'll hear from the appellants who will describe the grounds for the appeal. we will then hear public comment from individuals speaking on behalf of the appellants. each speaker will have up to two minutes. we'll then hear from the sfmta and the planning department who will have up to 10 minutes to describe the grounds for their determination that this project is exempt from environmental review. we'll then hear from individuals speaking on behalf of the project sponsor and each member of the...
SFGTV: San Francisco Government Television
64
64
Jun 8, 2014
06/14
by
SFGTV
tv
eye 64
favorite 0
quote 0
i want to thank the appellant in this case for it's diligence in the maintenance of that portion of the unapproved portion of montclair avenue. operational staff has been working with them as they are suggesting to acquire a grant to maintain that portion of the public right-of-way. one thing that must be pointed out that there is some misunderstanding of what is opening space and what is not. the appellant as part of their briefs show that they provided a section within their brief stating defining what the definition of open space was. in this case, because of claremont street is unimproved right-of-way it was definitely not considered open space by this definition. one thing, and i did go back at&t is correct that they did make several attempts within this neighborhood to identify alternative sites as they have identified two previous sites prior to coming to this final sight. the department did evaluate all three locations. we provided the public notification as the authorization of the public notice as required. there were objections as stated. i was not at the hearing but i did li
i want to thank the appellant in this case for it's diligence in the maintenance of that portion of the unapproved portion of montclair avenue. operational staff has been working with them as they are suggesting to acquire a grant to maintain that portion of the public right-of-way. one thing that must be pointed out that there is some misunderstanding of what is opening space and what is not. the appellant as part of their briefs show that they provided a section within their brief stating...
SFGTV: San Francisco Government Television
39
39
Jun 14, 2014
06/14
by
SFGTV
tv
eye 39
favorite 0
quote 0
the features i see here the planter box which provide some element of privacy i believe that's the appellants property is the property here which is to the west. and there's the set back there's the planters then the other elements here the barbecue the fire pit and seating >> and the bumper out didn't require any appendixes. >> that's correct. >> the permit holder has a document showing the stair going up like a little bit of a indistinct bump out for the barbecue area he use the timeframe 2012? is this the same set >> i don't see - let's see. so the location of the configuration of the stairs do appear to be the same on the permit that's on appeal as on the imprisonment permit that was approved the 2012 permit >> you indicated that is for january 2013. >> correct. >> i'm curious if you know this is the same drawing he's referencing he indicated the date of 2012 i can't remember and so those plans were prepared in 2012 and the notice was conducted in 2012 but the dr hearing was in 2013. >> so it could be the same set. >> there's a revision date on those of 9, 1, 2012 and i think what may hav
the features i see here the planter box which provide some element of privacy i believe that's the appellants property is the property here which is to the west. and there's the set back there's the planters then the other elements here the barbecue the fire pit and seating >> and the bumper out didn't require any appendixes. >> that's correct. >> the permit holder has a document showing the stair going up like a little bit of a indistinct bump out for the barbecue area he use...
SFGTV: San Francisco Government Television
32
32
Jun 14, 2014
06/14
by
SFGTV
tv
eye 32
favorite 0
quote 0
i also understand that supervisor wiener has recently sent a letter in support of the appellants. the castro open market benefit strict is a special ascertainment strict and extends from market street to omaha to castro down to 19 that includes the castro that includes parts of church and greener restraining order it's subject to both the california brown act and the california acts we take transparency they serial we said the portions of allowing time for the public to be heard the neighborhood association also take public comment very serial. i personally know that d t and s or a spend hours to thoroughly understand land issues to make sure their smart and well-thought-out we're all committed to prop g passed in 2007 allowing public comment and, in fact, district 8 heavily support that. we hear today to appeal the zoning administrators request are for the dpa regarding the property located on castro street. we respect the zoning administrator deliberations and his analysis of the formula retail ordinance and understand that the boyle's has the ability to allow the residents of sa
i also understand that supervisor wiener has recently sent a letter in support of the appellants. the castro open market benefit strict is a special ascertainment strict and extends from market street to omaha to castro down to 19 that includes the castro that includes parts of church and greener restraining order it's subject to both the california brown act and the california acts we take transparency they serial we said the portions of allowing time for the public to be heard the...
SFGTV: San Francisco Government Television
37
37
Jun 15, 2014
06/14
by
SFGTV
tv
eye 37
favorite 0
quote 0
that appeal is dental to the facts of the this evenings appeal in the crown castle case the appellants filed their appeal past the deadline and the respondents argued they should be granted their request requests and the department of public works should have a wireless facility permit despite the fact that dpw had no legal obligation to do that this board granted their jurisdiction request and just gold smith elevated that and his order specifically held that dpw was under no legal obligation for the permit application i quote the lack of notice was not grounds for on untimely appeal crown castle is 0i7b8 to this appeal at&t's appeal was granted and weeks after the mandatory 15 day jurisdiction deadline and mr. occurring our as notd not identified my code rigging dpw for thees vacation permit. in those circumstances the board lacks jurisdiction to grant the late appeal it's excess if it do d did so, so the request should be denied. >> thank you. >> thank you. we, hear from the department now commissioner fu fung. >> good evening john from the san francisco department of public works t
that appeal is dental to the facts of the this evenings appeal in the crown castle case the appellants filed their appeal past the deadline and the respondents argued they should be granted their request requests and the department of public works should have a wireless facility permit despite the fact that dpw had no legal obligation to do that this board granted their jurisdiction request and just gold smith elevated that and his order specifically held that dpw was under no legal obligation...