the current requester. the appeal was considered in february and upheld the variance decision. the dr requester is alice lamb of posting street which is directly west of the subject property. her concerns are that the project is not code compliant hence the variances, the rear decks awe butler firewall which could be a fire hazard and she has concerns about potential initial side from the decks. the original design team looked at the project and mind it does not contain imply exceptional circumstances. and the blank east wall and thus would have no effects on their privacy. it's consistent with the guidelines. the department recommends that the commission not take dr and approve the project >> thank you. so the dr requester you can q represent alicia lamb >> no. >> no. so does that mean we should move on >> is there anyone from the public who wants to speak from the public. >> i'm sorry because i had no idea about this case and i shouldn't say anything not to say anything i shouldn't say so i 0 would like to be silence. >> seeing none, let's have the project manager speak. >> i'm the

since that time, since our rehearing request there is substantial new information in that the architect, karen pay son when the dr was requested was representing the owner at that time of the house adjacent to the permit holders house at 615 buena vista and she recalls the meeting and and agreement made made and she instructed the then owner of the property, her client, to make sure the plans were submitted to planning and were signed off as consistent with the dr settlement and we presented that last time. we feel there is an equitable issue here. we believe that this project is an appropriate for this site and what the board looked at last time, we now have people from the neighborhood all of the dr requesters that were present ten years ago will be presenting that information tonight. we also have from miss peyton's office. she wanted to be here because there was a contact made from the permit holder to her to pressure her to change her affidavit. she can't be here. she's out of state. >> my name is samantha -- an architectural designer. she asked me to read they mail. she's out of state right now. with they m

it's not in the agreement that i and the other dr requesters made in 2002. thank you. >> before you sit down, i have a question. did you say you have an e-mail between you and the permit holder that states that something is the final agreement? you have a correspondence is that reflects the final agreement? >> on my computer i have 3 documents. the first was a letter from november 9, 2004. that went to the planning department where i referenced our agreement. >> november 2004? referencing an agreement. do you know with any specificity what agreement you are referring to? >> there were the drawings that we all signed off on. there was a letter from the architect which i included as an attachment in the letter which i no longer have a copy of. but hopefully it's in the planning department files. >> it was communicated via e-mail? >> no. it was a letter and then i have a letter january 3rd, 2005 to the project sponsor asking him about what the progress was. he wrote back to me and in january 12, 2005 i have another letter thanking him for the proceeding and i do

up first is the dr requester. you have five minutes.5 minutes. >> thank you. good afternoon, president fong and commissioners, my name is ryan patterson, attorney for the dr requester. we have some slides to show on the overhead. >> just lay them down. it will start working. >> we often hear how hard it is to open a business in san francisco. that maybe the case. but in this case, this is a restaurant that opened who you the any permits a year 1/2 ago and in the year 1/2 that followed until it was shut down by the health department. it produced a various number of impact on the neighborhood. this is a neighborhood zoned rh 3 residential where restaurant use is not normally allowed. the restaurant produced clouds of bacon smoke coming from an exhaust fan that was -- could have been fixed with duct tape and the restaurant was not willing to do that. the restaurant produces a lot of noise which is mostly significant for the rent control tenants upstairs which sent to you an e-mail last night. they couldn't make it because of the funeral today, but they say that th

the dr? okay. seeing none project sponsor, you have 5 minutes. >> thank you, president fong. jeremy paul, speaking on behalf of the project sponsor, dr requester. i would like to start with a few issues. this location was the location of the market delli. the kitchen it uses was an approved and permitted for the market delli. when bacon moved in there, it did not require a chance of use. there is no separation between bacon and the market. the very come to work within the same space. he filed the permit applications properly and began doing business with their permanence. on the subject of this building permit application is an improved ventilation system. it clear that it needed. an accusation is that there is a cloud of acrid smoke. the have made an inspection. the market. i would ooild -- i would like to go to the overhead computer if i could. there we go. something like it. here the vacant store fronts at frederick street. there have been vacant store fronts. i want to show you the flavor of this neighborhood. it's mixed markets. there are mom's that walk their kids to school and families in this area that enjoy a cup of coffee and enjoy f

the project sponsor. there any? >> okay seeing none. dr requester you have a two minute rebuttal >> just regarding the reiteratetion i provided there's documented each meeting that i had with the owners and i can assure you from november 2007 those were the items and it take a took a year so there was nothing to meet with the family to a continue to neat. we'd work anti some other stuff and wait, wait, wait. when i came there was a different architect and there was different plans and so they restraining order i brought on a respectable firm. i want to going go back to the third floor the shadow indicates a there's some dramatic impacts. i said there's a need to have a larger home. i have a home for 5 kids but - is this reasoning? i want to point out that i don't think the other edition billed build in the n 60's and the height of the home you can see how the neighborhood is by looking the entire block on both the ocean side and the homes that back up onto the cliff thank you >> second dr requester 0 two minute rebuttal. >> thank you. the home is vi

. >> as someone who was part of, you were the dr requester and you withdrew based on an agreement with respect to what was going to be done with the property, right? >> correct. >> were you or in -- how many requesters were there along with you? >> i don't remember. >> were you doing this on your own? or were you represented by council? >> it was council representing the group, i believe. >> including you and your interest? okay. and on the permit holder's side do you know if that person has council? >> i i don't recall. >> thank you. next speaker, please. >> good evening. my name is donna crowder. a real estate broker with san francisco and i was the listing agent at 601 buena vista west during the escrow period when the leffers were in contact with understand that go -- understanding that there was plans which impacted buena vista. i had a -- couple land use attorney who gave the additional three story additional to the leffers and to mr. tombey, and they were satisfied and mr. tombey withdrew his dr due to an agreement that was reached to withdraw the third story addition. and my un

the dr requesters proposal facts the light and air to this property. his penthouse light well has four windows within a stair and bathroom. it doesn't match the adjoining light well. the lack of matching light wells was overlooked you but the department accepts this modification. the dr folks are concerned about the post panels and roof access. the planning department is remedying that the planning department match the dr south light well, to adjust to 5 feet >> thank you. dr requester. >> good evening president fong and commissioners. this is my wife. i live at 2154 larkin street. i'd like to say thank you for your consideration of this discretionary review and i appreciate the help of the planning department. my wife and i have been renter and we moved into our home. the proposed project has us concerned that the increased height will adversely effect the light which is the primary reason we purified the home. we have vivid our life savings and the thought of living in this for the next 40 years saddened us. the areas that would be implicated are the

the dr request or primary concern is that it does not meet the market based on the commercial space which requires use authorization. to legalize the use size limits and is considered specification of non-conforming use. there is not a permit of the delli use and helps code violation in sufficient waiting areas. it will provide to dr requester and presentation. according to the record, the former authorized use at 205 frederick street, as the market as a limited commercial non-conforming use with rh 3 zoning district. the subject lot is within a quarter mile of hayes street. the commercial controls, also apply to subject property. within the rh 3 zone is district, the operation of limited commercial non-conforming use should be between the period of the planning code. >> normal days and hours of service, 5 days a week, a minimum of two meal services should be provided during each business day. a catering establishment is used as a commissary and the neighborhood district. it's not conforming use of the 1994 planning code section 191. in addition planning for the provision with the the hay

we don't contend that there is a written agreement beyond the dr requester signing off on the plans. the reason we brought that up today is we believe the merit of the appeals relies on the lack of the merit on the project and for the small lot as i believe you eloquently explained that when we were here last, commissioner. we felt it was important for the this board to understand that this had gone through ten years ago and there was an understanding. i'm a lawyer, so i know the contracts dealing with real property should be in writing and there were not. the lawyers are unavailable and don't have records that we have been able to find. we have looked, i assure you. but there doesn't seem to be anything. as an equitable matter what we are were hearing from the project applicant that this is only fair and we are trying to do something and we just wanted to show the equities are all within the neighborhood and that is all in good faith that has not been shown by the permit holder. that was the point that we wanted to corroborate it since there was a dispute. thank you. >> comments? >>

that my point is that i am trying to get to the specifics of what part of the agreement that the dr requesters find to be objectable. >> at this point it is the size of the deck. >> so we can focus on that. and then the commissioners can get an idea of whether they feel and your main concern on the size would be presumably because it is visible from the street and it detracts from the historic appearance of the house or... >> no the wind screen is not... and the deck is (inaudible). >> okay. so that does not sound like it has a historic issue. >> no. >> okay. i will see what the other commissioners have to say. i am just trying to find a way that the current owners can enjoy a little more open space out there and as well as it is not bothering anybody in the neighborhood i think that it should be okay. >> they do have a deck. that is the question of size. >> okay. >> commissioners? >> okay, i guess for me, we have to remember that there was a dr filed originally. and because of that dr, the developer and the neighborhood, then, took the time to negotiate the agreement. which is something that

and now one of the allegations by the dr requesters is a truck is there all of the time and although you showed the pictures of the various sized trucks being there since 1980 for the market. it goes through this for the distribution, is that the case? >> it is the case, thank you, commissioner antonini for this clarification. and there is a significant yellow zone, in front of this building, but, i think that it is about 75 feet. it was put in for the ash bury market and deli and it is used for deliveries but it has a 30-minute limitation and bacon bacon respects that and they do not do the primary servicing of the trucks and do not do the cleaning of the food trucks at that location. and it is important that they be able to stop there and make use of that yellow zone for less than 30 minutes. and if there is anyone else in the community. they were using as their primary come sarry and they were doing their very best to adhere to the 30-minute limitation. going forward, they will not be using it as the primary come sarry, but they do need to be able to access the storage and the per

and the living room and light and all of the things that we really spend a lot of time sending the dr requests back to work with each other on the subject and the things that we are setting to be worked out. and this is not the case here. and if this project was unbias and we would take the dr and make the modifications and it would not just basically say that because it was an agreement that means that we have to up hold the agreement. i think that only comes after we have given the type of guidance we are asked to give you. and so, i basically want to take issue in the interpretation of commissioner sugaya and more trend towards what commissioner hillis understands we cause and interpret and so i am more in support and more support of your motion while to have taking the dr and modifying the project and look at the plans and see a lot of what we can agree on and what guidance we want to give the project when we are out. >> commissioner borden. >> i think that what the struggle is for us, i feel terrible that this agreement was not lifed up to and that the neighborhood felt like they had agre

dr requesters have limited open space because the rock walls. and steep hillside. and rdr requests subjects and that source will be removed second, reduce the depths of the two story rear addition from 15 to 12 feet and is set in seven feet instead of five feet from the north side. and the number three, modify the windows on the north side and to mitigate the privacy impact. and the department and the staff are analysis on all of the dr concerns, first, the project has to be reviewed twice by the residential design team. and the guidelines does not necessarily prohibit the additional source for the addition, even in this situation. but the guidelines do require the source be set back, which the proposal has done. and it has a buried from the front set back and 12 and 16 feet respectively. and then the rear addition, is thes limited to 15 feet that is not deeper than both adjacent houses with the five foot to allow it on either side and then the roof deck on top of this, the two story addition has been limited to ten feet by ten feet and that is a

the superintendent or designee. >> i am going to ask dr. blanco to come forward and read. >> you can just read us the requested action which i believe is quite brief. >> the requested action of the board of education of the san francisco unified school district convene a public hearing and adopt the annual budget and annual service plan for special education. >> nicely done. >> okay. i have several speakers signed up for this item. robin hansen has left. mega and katie franklin, two minutes, each. please. >> hi, megan calusa, i am a special education teacher and i want to comment on the fact that our local area plan has not been updated for a while and it was mentioned that as special education starts to look a little different in this district, we need to start planning for what that looks like as a whole district. as it becomes a bigger part of our district in that thoughtfulness that goes into the planning for making sure that the teachers are prepared and that the district is prepared for it as a community. and i think that looking at our local area plan and having a discussion about it and updating it, so that we all have a singular vis

the superintendent or designee. >> i am going to ask dr. blanco to come forward and read. >> you can just read us the requested action which i

they're able to accumulate last minute requests and they have excellent translation unit and it make sure they meet the needs and the experience. >> thank you, dr. are there any items removed for first reading by the board seeing none. any items severed by the board for discussion this evening >> i have one item. i do want to say as others in the past i don't want to vote against that. i'm a little worried that staff might have to hang around for 3 hours so can you think can i ask the question now >> maybe we can found out what the nature of the question is but not a have a discussion. >> this item is k 13 on page 77 it's an evaluation with the educational training but it's for a group of programs. i actually called our research people this is not out of the blue. i'm interested in if we can have a discussion coming up to talk about the design of our assessments and evaluations. whether the purpose of those second on the it would be your duty. the original and substitute motion is in the agenda. i'd like to consider the substitute motion we discussed the other evening. is there any objection? yes conspires. the - >> not . >> the meeting was fro

the same woman, who would repeatedly show up in his life. somebody looking to get paid. somebody who viewed mike as an atm. >> reporter: though he turned down our request for an interview, drrown did speak in this deposition. >> darlina lied on the witness stand. her mother lied on the witness stand. the day of the trial. and the jury believed darlina and not the truth. >> reporter: ultimately, he pleaded no contest to aggravated assault charges in exchange for ten years probation and set off to resume his life. but the doctor's inner demons would not be silenced. there would soon be a new wife. new accusations. more sensational headlines. and another judgment day in court. >> he went in a rage and grabbed her. >> he was a dangerous man, and i wanted him to be held accountable for what he did this time. >> reporter: stay with us. >> look at my face. >> reporter: stay with us. >> look at my face. see a man driven to insanity. at ♪ it's got something for everyone ♪ ♪ the car of the future many have said ♪ ♪ 'cause at the pump it's miles ahead ♪ ♪ and let's hum, hum, hum, hum ♪ let's hum ♪ a prius for everyone ♪ [ male announcer ] now get 0% apr financing for 60 months on the

the strength to defend it. >> reporter: this coalition of prolife groups have a request. they want the city of philadelphia to turn over the remains of 45 babies aborted at the clinic of dr.osnell so they can give him a proper funeral and burial. he was convicted of may in murdering three babies who survived abortion. so far the city has said no even though the bodies remain unclaimed. >> abortion has dishonored them. we want to honor them. abortion has treated them as garbage. we want to treat them with the revence due to human beings. >> let not these children be brutalized again! let not these children suffer the barberism again by the city of philadelphia. >> reporter: today when they tried to deliver a letter to the medical examiner asking for information on the bodies, they were locked out. the philadelphia medical examiner's office tells fox that it has received, quote, multiple requests by third-party groups to claim the remains of the babies. and that, quote, the city has determined that these remains will not be relieved to any unrelated third party. the remains will be given a proper and respectful disposition by the city in accordance with our standard practic

request. >> dr. murase? >> aye >> wynns? >> aye. >> norton. >> yes. >> thank you. >> item p. there were several consent calendar resolutions severed for board discussion. by commissioner wynns. if you want to take the contracts since i believe that we addressed the questions. >> the items are the contract that are to the two and so we can. >> we will roll call on c2. >> thank you. >> ly. >> yes. >> fewer. >> yes. >> haney >> yes. >> maufas. >> yes. >> mendoza. >> yes. >> murase. >> aye. >> wynns >> aye. >> and norton. >> aye. >> on the next page, it is b7. right? >> the and then the k32. >> right, so page 87. the yellow pages. >> yes. so the education protection account and this is a budget issue too. but this is interestingly, this is sort of the now, new version of the tier three thing that we had to do last time. you get a certain amount of revenue almost, $250, or $300 million >> we just don't call it the revenue limit any more. >> there is property taxs that we receive. >> great. >> and state aid to make that up >> in the state aid will be the pa. and it was set up because of prop 30 and if you go to page 87 c you will get that state of california cde has put together a separate resource for t

requestioning. >> it's my note. >> i'm going to ask the court for a copy of these. i'm going to want to have an opportunity to review them more carefully and have an opportunity to question drspecifically about them. i need a little time to do that. i can proffer why, but i need that time. i think the rules provide anything that a witness uses -- >> this is a speaking argument. we can do that outside the presence of the jury. ladies and gentlemen, we'll break for lunch at this time. please put your note pads face down. we'll be back at 1:00 p.m. during the lunch hour do not discuss this case amongst yourself or with anybody else. do not read or listen to any radio, television or newspaper reports about this case. do not use any type of an electronic device to get on the internet to do independent research about the case, people, places, things or events. do not read or create any e-mails, text messages, twitters, tweets or blogs. do you all understand these rules and will abide by them? >> yes. >> judge debra nelson letting this jury go for lunch a little bit earlier than usual. nine members of this jury. there are six who will determine guilt or innocence. it cannot be und

dr. kobilinsky, mark geragos. sunny, i think you may be right now would argue that the state has proved second degree murder beyond a reasonable doubt. but if you were prosecuting this case, would you still requesthe jury to be able to consider a lesser charge? >> oh, no question about it. you want the jury to have options, because it's something that prosecutors do, anderson, all the time. and so i can tell you that they're going to ask for the lesser included and they're going to get it from the judge. because they have evidence that could support a manslaughter conviction. i do think, though, that the judge agrees with me. the judge ruled there was enough evidence of second degree murder to go to the jury. and there is enough evidence. what you have to consider is the prosecution has this case in pieces of a puzzle, almost without the benefit of having the box cover to the puzzle. in closing argument, they'll put those pieces together for the jury and make the picture very evident. and so, you know, we're saying now, well, there's no evidence of second degree murder. that's just not true. i know mark geragos is over there giggling, because i can hear him in my ear. but it's true. there isn't.

the request of family members as well. so again, not on the stand for very long at all today. somewhere between five and ten minutes. before that, i think you guys were talking about dr. vincent di maio, who to this point has probably been arguably the defense's strongest witness. >> all right, craig melvin. thanks for that. stay with us. let's check in with our legal team. patrick murphy is back. seema ire is back. paul henderson is back. paul, i know you want to jump in. what do you got? >> i think why they put him on, because the defense team wanted to marginalize the identifications from it the family identifying that was trayvon's voice. they're just planting the seeds of doubt in front of the jury that maybe the tape should have been played differently. maybe the family communicated with each other to bolster the recognition that they had of the voice that they've testified to. so that's why they had him on there. so we'll see how the prosecution takes that, but that's the argument i expect from this witness from the defense. >> all right. this conference breaking up. not sure how much more time we have. quickly, seema, i want to talk to you for a second about

ears can mark as it was included in the budget request and there's no direct funding for the project. it simply provides thrt to transfer other funds for the project. dr. burgess' amendment would shut down operations and essentially waisting -- wasting the $200 million already spent. i urge you to support domestic uranium enrichment technology and oppose this amendment. with that, i yield back. the chair: the gentleman yields back. the sque on the amendment offered by the gentleman from texas. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair the noes visit. the amendment -- the gentleman from texas. mr. burgess: i request the yeas and nays. the chair: does the gentleman request a recorded vote? mr. burgess: i request a recorded vote. the chair: pursuant to clause 6 of rule 18, further proceedings will be postponed. for what purpose does the gentleman from texas rise? >> i have an amendment at the desk. the chair: designate the amendment. mr. burgess: amendment number 0 p 8. the chair: the clerk will report. the clerk: amendment offered by mr. burgess of texas, page 30, line 6, strike the colon and all that follows through activit

the next morning on monday, dr. martin luther king jr. came to selma, came to my bedside. dr. king said don't worry. we will make it to montgomery. the voting act right will be passed. he had requests from religious leaders to come to selma. on march 9, more than 1000 religious leaders came to selma and later that night, three young ministers, one of them from boston, went out to get something to eat at a restaurant. when they returned, they were attacked by members of the klan. the reverend was sosa barely beaten he had to be transferred to a hospital in birmingham and the next day he died. because of what happened in selma, president johnson called governor wallace to washington to try to get assurance from him he would be able to protect us. wonderful man. he testified what happened. he ordered governor wallace to -- the governor could not ensure the president you would be able to protect us so president johnson came to congress a days after bloody sunday. and made one of the meaningful speeches and the american president had made in modern time. over the question of voting rights and civil rights. he started by saying i speak tonight for the dignity of man and the destiny of de

john a do you suggest we close the public hearing >> so is there representative of the dr requester to give a rebuttal. >> you would have two minutes in order to respond to what you've harder. >> no response 90 from me and to the project sponsor you have an option of 2 minutes for additional information. >> yes. i again so far as what's there now so far as what we're proposing is just a reconvene formulation of 65 square feet in size. and the way it's configured it's meant to be done in a sensitive manner to law the light in. so the existing stair of what's there the majority of the structure that's really a mass of the stairway but by creating the proposed design the way you know the deck is down and the stairs are configured in the way this year you don't have a mass in the backyard anymore and it leafs, you know, is corner of this rear yard opens to light and this the the corner that shows all other bakdz and we're doing a good service to all the other neighbors so thank you >> thank you. the public hearing portion of this item is closed. commissioner moore awaits variance granted i