trasvina's question. it is simple. >> grant the appeal and revoke the permit on the basis that it is not code compliant. >> okay. >> commissioners any comments? related to this case? or it would that be an appropriate motion? >> i'm in full agreement with that approach going forward. >> okay >> anybody else? i will make that motion. >> go. >> fine. >> motion to grant the appeal on the basis that the permit was not purposely issued on the basis it is not code compliant >> we have a motion from vice president lopez to grant the appeal revoke the permit on the basis it is not code compliant and was not properly issued. on that motion commissioner trasvina. >> aye. >> commissioner eppler. >> aye >> president swig. >> aye. that motion carries 4-0. what is happening that concludes that matter. item 5. du get in touch with the requestors? they stated tins the tree had been remove exclude noted that the board told them a jurisdiction request does in the suspend the action that he thought this was moot and not att

commissioner trasvina. >> thank you. without attempt to challenge the advice, i want to join vice president lopez in this request. but i also like as part of this discussion to discuss the issue of i'm not clear whether we contemplating this part of the matter on the november 16th. the issue of how departments take away cases from the board of appeals. and i want to note that our new website first thing says we provide a review process for appeals a range of city determinations and help the public and new members to know what determinations there are and how they are on the list or taken off. given the preliminary mention of that by vice president lopez i like that as part of the discussion. >> might i suggest we consider that a separate agenda item for a later time great idea and great training another great training item we should tag on to a future agenda and as soon as possible. >> okay. >> if i could you want that part. >> if i could responded. while it make a training item it is a substantive issue. as to whether w

trasvina. >> thank you. i was intrigued by mr. green's analysis of the situation. it was upon an idea of you with drawing the permit. and the city agencies working to address the violation they are now aware of. do you have reaction to his notion of your with drawing of the permit? >> yes. i talked to alec who the legal acystant and advised not to it limits our rights he said to go through with the appeal. and because we don't know the codes well, we don't want to limit if we learn fruabout what the next steps are and go that route. >> we learn from you, too. >> thank you. >> thank you. the planning department? >> thank you. again. on that last issue i do think that the cleanest option all around the reasons denying is because it upholds the permit properly issued. it does in the change the fact that they would need to move forward and implement the permit and remove the stair and deck or separately keep that issued don't take action on it file a variance application to legalize the deck if they got that var

commissioner trasvina and commissioner eppler and deputy city earn john withhold provide need legal devicecutive director we'll be joined by the city departments. corey teague the za representatives planning and matthew green with dbi. the board

commissioner trasvina and commissioner eppler. welcome. >> and commissioner lemberg is abcents also the deputy city attorney will provide legal advice. i'm julie rosenberg the board's executive director we'll be