Transcripts For SFGTV LIVE BOS Land Use Committee 20151123

Good afternoon everyone. Welcome welcome. This meeting will come to order. This is the regular meeting of the land use and transportation committee. I am Supervisor Malia Cohen chair of the committee to my right is Supervisor Scott Wiener and joining us is jane kim and we have a guest today supervisor john avalos. Our clerk today is alisa somera. I would like to thank sfgtv who be working with us televising and broadcasting this meeting on sfgtv. Sfgtv madam clerk do we have any announcements today. Yes. Please silence all cell phones. Completed speaker cards submitted to the clerk and items will be on thed. Items acted on today will be on the december 1 board of supervisors agenda unless otherwise stated. Thank you very much. Jd you please call item 1. Item 1 is amending the planning code to establish a citywide Transportation Sustainability fee and apply to citywide Transportation Services and Homeless Services for [inaudible] okay colleagues this is a copy of this sent back to the full board to us so we could memorialize a few Fee Structure for the medical and hospital services. After weeks of conversation i am pleased to report to the full Board Meeting we reached an agreement, the nonprofit hospitals to contribute to the Public Transportation system. In the initial proposal all hospitals were 100 exempt from paying tsf on new Hospital Medical Service Facilities but as a result the negotiation and the ordinance was amended to include two points. The first one is an 18. 74 fee on net new hospital beds Effective Immediately and not after the seismic mandate. The second point is a new 11dollar fee on medical Services Buildings over the 12,000 square foot mark. Now both new hospital beds and new medical services have an impact on our Transportation System, and its essential and fair that everyone contribute something to the system which serves the patients as well as employees, so colleagues i have circulated a few more cleanups to the changes to the language that we introduced and as a result of ongoing discussions with the Hospital Council about the final proposal. They include a few key points which im going to read into the record. First its cleaning up of definitions to use the term outlined in section 102 of the planning code for Health Service and hospitals. Second its adding a reference that grandfathered non residential and pdr portions of projects are subject to this but pay the applicable rate. The third point is adding a reference to the calculation section on page 11 clarifying that the tsf is calculated only on the amount of net new gross square feet for the project and consistent with references in the planning code. The next point is a simplification of fee, calculation for new hospital beds and adding a formula which matches the language describing the calculation in the methodology. The fifth point r point is adding a provision for future changes from hospital to non hospital use and pay them based on Square Footage not received the benefit not receive the benefit of hospital examination. The sixth is the goal of this change was to clarify that the hospital exemption is intended to benefit hospital uses not future Property Owners who will be changing the use of something such as office and would have otherwise paid a high rate if they built the project, and finally the final additions some other grammatical and non substantive changes in the ordinance that are included at the request of the city attorney, so these changes are non substantive. Theyre clean up in nature to the conceptual agreement we reached a few weeks ago. I would like to thank the staff who assisted myself and staff to come into the agreement and includes mta, planning, d hp and the City Attorneys Office as well as the members of the Hospital Council for working with us on this compromise and recognize ed reiskin and others from mta and the Planning Department, colleen from dph, andrea [inaudible] my apologies from the City Attorneys Office and david from the Hospital Council who are here today. Also i want to acknowledge my staff who has been instrumental. Many of you have connected with her as we negotiated this so colleagues given the number of hearings and hours we have spent on this staff is here for questions but not making a formal presentation and if there are no comments perhaps we can move to Public Comment. Guest number one. Supervisor avalos. Thank you and im glad that we sent this item to committee with the duplicated file that has the amendments that we have made that grand father in the non Residential Commercial projects that were bmitted before july 21, 2015 to pull pay the full fee. The amount of money that i am seeing from my legislative aid that this will enable us to access for transit is about 2. 1 million dollars. Im not sure if that is the amount of money that will be paid in full i think its the difference what was these we were going to pay for the old one to the tsf so its a significant amount of money and i appreciate my colleagues supporting this amendment and its part that we have done to actually grow the amount of money we have for transportation projects that the tsf will fund so thank you. Thank you very much. Are there any other members . All right seeing none lets take Public Comment. I have one Public Comment card here. Why dont you come up and as a point of reminder Public Comment is two minutes. You will hear a soft chime indicating that you have 30 seconds left. Thank you for being here. Well members of the committee and thank you for that summary. I do want take a moment and echo your comments supervisor and acknowledge your leadership on the issue bringing the parties together, staff and others on the board. We think this is equitable solution and one that as a community we can live with so thank you. Thank you very much. Its a pleasure to work with you and your team. Next speaker please. Good afternoon supervisor. Im from the San Francisco chamber of commerce. The chamber was hoping that hospitals and medical centers and nonprofits would fall under the chairible exemption but we understand the reasons for the amendment we want to commend the Hospital Council, supervisor cohen and her staff for working out what is really a reasonable and equitable decision on hospitals and the chamber is supportive of the tsf. Thank you. Thank you very much. Are there any other members to speak on this item . Seeing none. Public comment is now closed. [gavel] so colleagues as i mentioned in the opening remarks i think we struck the right balance, deal to ensure that hospitals and medical Service Facilities are contributing to our Transportation System while recognizing they provide an important public benefit. What i would like to do at this time is make a motion that we adopt the amendments that i have circulated and forward this to the full board with a positive recommendation. So i will make a motion for the amendments and move this forward with recommendation and just before we vote i do want to just thank chair cohen for all of your work on this. This is a very complicated ordinance with moving pieces and interested stakeholders and different perspectives coming to this compromise agreement on how to balance payment for impact on traffic which i think our hospitals certainly contribute to but finding a more fair way to actually assess that and by Square Footage is a nice balance and i want to appreciate the Hospital Council for working closely with your office to get to this place so thank you for everyones work. Thank you. A motion has been made and seconded and without objection this motion passes unanimously. [gavel] thank you. Thank you for the support colleagues. Thank you andrea and david. Madam clerk could you please call the next item. Would you like me to call two and three together. Yes, i would. Item two and three are amending the rincon hill area plan and zoning map for limits and tower separations at 525 harrison street. All right. Thank you so much. Supervisor kim is the lead on this, and im going to turn it over to supervisor kim. Thank you chair cohen and also happy to see these two items come before the land use committee. First of all i do want to thank the developer for cooperating and working with our office over the last three months since august when it came to the Planning Commission. Towards working with us on a project that provides increased Affordable Housing on site, but also takes into account some of the Design Elements and concerns raised by the Planning Commission. This site is a very unique site located just north of the 80 bay bridge, and is a very strangely shaped parcel and of course across the street from many residential towers in construction now as part of the rincon hill master plan and zoned at 400 feet and we are going to be making some amendments to the rincon hill plan to allow for a tower that is able to provide more Square Footage and builds Additional Units on the site. This project requires payment to the rincon Hill Community infrastructure impact fee and also the Soma Stabilization Fund to support neighborhood Infrastructure Improvements and Community Stabilization and funds over 5 million. What is introduced at the full board is legislation that reduces the requirement on the tower separation control to accommodate for the tower. Rather than a squatter base per the Planning Commissions recommendation it commits the project to a higher below market commitment of 12 which is required via law up to 15 and i want to appreciate the developers for providing this commitment with the additional 26 units that will be built on site. The project sponsor is committed to paying 50 of the fund fees which we passed identity of committee today, and it also commits the project to complete significant Pedestrian Safety improvements surrounding the towers base and including sidewalk widening and trees and signalized krowkz on harrison and exessex and important to the those in the area and advocates in district 6. As we build development in the high density areas and high entry corridors important to mitigate for residents coming to the area and i am pleased to see that harrison and essex will be more residential friendly through the passage of this project despite being right at the mouth of one of the freeway areas. These are the basic overall components of the project. I see that Planning Department is here to present on the specificities of the parcel so im going to hand things over to our department unless there are any questions or comments from committee members. Supervisor wiener has a few comments. Thank you very much. I maybe planning will address this in terms of the tsf that is paid and [inaudible] and also the rationale around the affordability percentage. I can comment afterwards. All right. Thank you very much. Good afternoon supervisors. Rich from the Planning Department staff. The legislation for you is a request to initiate legislation associated with the general plan amendment, planning code text amendment and zoning map amendment for the project at 525 harrison street. The proposed legislation includes a general plan amendment of the rincon hill area for the tower spacing and requirements of the San Francisco planning code. The planning code text amendment allows for the spacing requirements for the block. The proposed zoning map amendment from 65 400r height to 65 250r height and accommodate a project at harrison street which clsd a new includes a residential tower and 500 square feet of retail space and 103 parking spaces. The Planning Commission recommended approval of the general plan amendment, the text Code Amendment and the zoning amendment. At the public hearing the commission reviewed the proposal to include the inclusionary housing requirement from 12 to 15 and accomodate for the payment of the fee thats board passed today so this concludes my presentation and i am available for questions. Just to address some of supervisor wieners comments on the affordability. It was accommodated due to the proposed legislation before you so because theyre getting an increase in Development Potential from the legislation were able to accommodate for increase in affordability. Madam chair may i . Yes please. So in terms of the rationale for 50 of tsf instead of 100 of tsf . I might defer to the project sponsor on that. Good afternoon supervisors. Steve from [inaudible] on behalf of the project sponsor. The ordinance you passed tsf has a 50 payment for projects in the pipeline. We committed to doing that regardless of the legislation and were fully in tune with the legislation. So its the grandfathering. Correct. Thank you. I wanted to clarify that so we negotiated this in september before we knew what the final amendments would be but i asked the project sponsor to scmit to 50 which is ultimately what was selected for the grandfathering and the full board but this was committed before that and i want to appreciate that commitment. Thank you. Thank you. Okay. Well, is there any Public Comment at this time . Please come on up. Supervisors good afternoon. I am Cameron Faulkner and we brought some slides of the presentation. We can quickly run through that if you would like. I would like to introduce myself. Let you know we have been working on this project in collaboration let me ask you sir how many slides . Thats five. Okay. [inaudible] sure. Lets begin. Are they cued up . Sure. Okay. So this is just a very brief summary of the slides that we presented Planning Commission. This is hard to read but gives a summary of the project. I think supervisor kim alluded to this. Its 205 unit project, 22 stories of occupied space. It was originally 25 on site affordable units and increased now to 31. The project is at the corners of harrison and essex. Weve got the bulk showing here on the massing that was ultimately a collaboration with the commissioners of the Planning Commission and planning staff and our team. Solomon cord benz is the architect and you can see that the sculpting was done to meet the vision of rincon hill and the strong base and the tower above, so thats the one side of the project. Heres an architectural rendering from the other side showing how we pulled the tower back from the freeway from the exist ramps creating that face and the lessening of the facades along those lines. This is a rendering of the project as its now conceived. Its been sort of lightened up to match the rincon hill i am out of time. Sorry about that. Just continue. I wanted to show the before and after of the streetscape. The upper left corner shows the building on site. It was a old Racquetball Club and currently a night club and auto detail shop and uses in line with the rincon hill rincon plan and this will bring active uses, a cafe, bike shop, pedestrian and safety improvements which were pleased with. I have a couple of emails from vision zero and the folks supporting us and helping us come up with the plan for the Pedestrian Safety improvements so i will leave those with you here. I wanted to give you that quick overlay and answer any questions that you have. Thank you very much. I appreciate your presentation. Lets see. Lets go ahead and open up for Public Comment at this time. If there any members of the public that are here sir, are you done . Sir, are you done . Yeah. Okay. Just hanging out there at the podium. If there is any members of the public that would like to comment on items two and three please come up at this time. Public comment is open. Seeing none. Public comment is now closed. Supervisor kim. Thank you chair cohen. I have passed out a series of minor amendments to make to these two items today. The general plan amendments make no substantive changes. Just clerical changes and updated and corrected title and findings. The planning Code Amendment adds the requirement to add 15 Affordable Housing on site and use the tower and basing exceptions on page seven lines 16 and as a finding of the exceptions allow 20 or larger for potential so that the city may require marijuana. Affordable housing permitted on this site and as listed. Thank you supervisor kim. Pretty easy. Supervisor wiener is there any remarks . All right. Supervisor kim is there a motion . Yes, i would like to make a motion to amend. All right. The motion to amends made by supervisor kim. Seconded by supervisor cohen and without objection that motion passes. And i would like to make a motion to move both items to the full board with positive recommendation. Absolutely and without objection that motion passes unanimously. Thank you very much. Madam clerk any other items before this body . That concludes the business. Thank you ladies and gentlemen. This meeting is adjourned. [gavel] Vice President was great good evening and welcome to the wednesday, october 28, 2015, meeting of sfrldz the public defender e presiding officer is commissioner president ann lazarus joined by commissioner honda and commissioner fung and commissioner rick swig commissioner Bobbie Wilson that will absent this evening is robert ryan and at the controls the boards legal assistant cable car and im Cynthia Goldstein the boards executive director were departments that have cases before this board. Senior inspector, next item. Joe duffy is sitting at the table in the front and representing the department of building inspection and Scott Sanchez Planning Department who is Zoning Administrator and representing the Planning Commission and carli short with the department of public works with mapping and now the superintendent of urban forestry congratulation please be advised the ringing of and use of cell phones and other Electronic Devices are prohibited. Out in the hallway. Permit holders and others have up to 7 minutes to present their case and 3 minutes for rebuttal. People affiliated with these parties must conclude their comments within 7 minutes, participants not affiliated have up to 3 minutes no rebuttal. To assist the board in the accurate preparation of the minutes, members of the public are asked, not required to submit a speaker card or Business Card to the clerk. Speaker cards and pens are available on the left side of the podium. The board welcomes your comments. There are Customer Satisfaction forms available. If you have a question about the schedule, speak to the staff after the meeting or call the board office tomorrow we are located at 1650 mission street, suite 304. This meeting is broadcast live on sfgovtv cable channel 78. Dvds are available to purchase directly from sfgovtv. Thank you for your attention. Well conduct our swearing in process. If you intend to testify and wish to have the board give your testimony evidentiary weight, please stand and say i do. Please note any of the members may speak without taking if you could stand now thank you do you solemnly swear or affirm the testimony youre about to give will be the whole truth and nothing but the truth . I do. Okay. Thank you very much commissioners we have one housekeeping item 8 which is appeal number. 1 dash 070 at cresting visiting the parties ask this be continued until november 4th, 2015, trying to workout a settle of their own we need a vote. So moved. Thank you commissioner fung by Public Comment on item 8 seeing none, on that motion from commissioner fung to move this to november 4th commissioner president lazarus commissioner honda and with commissioner wilson absent that motion carries moving to item one general Public Comment anyone that wants to address the board on items not on tonight agenda is there anyone from the public that wishes to speak under general Public Comment seeing none, move to item 2 commissioners questions or comments. Commissioners im sorry. inaudible yes general Public Comment if you have something to say now is your chance. inaudible . I see this is actually not item one well get to that in a few minutes thank you item 2 commissioners that is questions or comments anything okay. So seeing none, move to item 3 the consideration of the october 14, 2015, board minutes. Commissioners any additions, deletions, or changes if not may i have a motion. So moved. Thank you. Is there any Public Comment on the minutes seeing none, on the minutes we have a motion to do you want them by the Vice President on that motion commissioner fung commissioner president lazarus and commissioner swig that that motion carries so, now move to item number 4 is a jurisdiction request the subject property on santa fe after the board received a whatever requester asking the board take jurisdictions over the permit application which was issued onion may 2015 did appeal ended on may 15th and it was filed on august in 2015 the permit holder and to remove two Living Spaces on the first floor commercial step forward and rove the store the 1 floor street unit to be returned to commercial pace space for conditional use application the board voted with commissioner swig to continue this to allow the times for the permit for the permit holder to provide intention with respect to the permit on october 14th this matter was continued to tonight because of a loss of quorum and before we begin commissioner swig i believe youve received union street the file and video and ready to participated thank you so much so commissioner president lazarus i was going to do suggest to hear from the permit holder first and since youve asked him to come back to speak to the board and hear from the departments and requester so if youd like to come forward thank you and 3 minutes. Yes. Okay. Youll have 3 minutes. Kevin tread well. Could you speak into the other microphone. Im kevin i pulled the permit at the request of the owner he is the new owner the building and part of progress of taking ownership was to be sure that the property was code compliant so it shows that and please overhead. There we go. You can use the other microphone swing that over. Figure it out so this building was built in the 19 hundred and has been a commercial at street level both 663 and 665 for a number of years since the 1980s when was was allowed a commercial noncompliant commercial use the owner purchased it earlier this year and the fitting parts on 663 was still active commercial space somewhere along the line in the last few years the downstairs of 5665 was converted to living space without permits those two rooms. Im sorry you need to speak into the meek as youre working with that. Those rooms are illegal bedrooms one the reasons besides not permitted there is no way to create an egress window in this space there was other issues that we were perfectly happy to capri with to make the Building Code compliant so getting the permit ive talked with the Building Permits and verbiage was added to make sure it was clear to return to commercial used by the city i was told that wouldnt be an issue we then received the letter from the residents so as you can see from the way the building is built this being the front the street side of the property there really isnt any way to put in a legal bedroom in this property without a major renovation to the ground floor. So the intent to remove the illegal rooms and eventually turn it back to commercial space. Thank you. Mr. Sanchez. Let me ask a question first, the reason this case was continued the first time was there was a document in the brief that indicated the permit holder was withdrawing this permit; is that correct or not correct. There was an initial thought to do that i stated but pulled that we realized it was not necessary to remove the permit there was a discussion i actually filed it and went back the next morning in discussion it was better to move forward as it was originally submitted. Okay sorry thank you. Mr. Sanchez. Thank you Scott Sanchez Planning Department one of the reasons this item was continued to get more clarity to confirm the permits were issued correctly and building the Planning Department reviewed that and no notice was required for the smubt permit im available to answer any questions. So just a question that from the property has not been commercial for how many years would it require a conditional use. It has been abandon for the conditional use authorization would be needed to restore it this permit application didnt require that it seems of the two spaces one of them the side with the printing seems to be active within the last 3 years and the odds 3 years since a commercial use and need to establish the location. We havent determined it. Based on the information and the print shop i believe earlier this year and for the other space it was stated in an email three years ago. So that is based to rare conditional use to restore to commercial use. It is legal nonconforming. Not typical permitted in the commercial use anulnar limited use can continue with restrictions. Thank you mr. Sanchez. Thank you mr. Duffy. Good evening, commissioners joe duffy dbi short the permit seems to be reviewed properly by dbi i checked on complaints no active complaints so it is voluntary work and as i said, i didnt see anything wrong with the permit. Thank you. Okay. Thank you mr. White horn. Good evening madam president and commissioners im here to contest the permit granted to joseph he never got a notice and when of the application was submitted a requirement of sf 311 and state law requires the landlord notice the tenants before applying for the permit the gentleman never contacted me and let me know he was seeking for a demolition which had i known would have done a block block notice hes returning this to a commercial space coauthored to the assessors those office a rh2 family 4 unit building two distinct address my address and the address next door to me the address right next door to me basing has been a typically space for the landlord son for a number of years he moved out as the property was purchased by mr. Bravo. Its a apartment where we live when you first walk in is a living room a long hallway my roommates room a kitchen my room a bathroom and a backdoor to a garden upon receiving the permit the landlord is supposed to accelerate the neighbors the permits was granted no such permit was granted thank you very much. No such sign has been posted so on. Any Public Comment on this item . Seeing none, commissioners, the matter is submitted. Mr. Sanchez if you dont mind addressing the issue of the required notices please. Over the course Scott Sanchez Planning Department so as discussed in other case pursuant to the planning code is not required for the removal of the twenl eastbound only required for a legal dwelling unit that has authorization the 3r report listed this as a singlefamily detrimental and pending legislation that could expand the planning code 317 requirement for loss of dwelling units to also unit not authorized as today, the law currently on applies to legal units and we have to evidence the lower floors of this building a legally dwelling units. Where is that legislation. It has been introduced by commissioner avalos following up open interim controls h he has introduced and i believe the Planning Commission will be hearing it in december. Oh, i dont think there is a basis for a jurisdiction request. Under the current provision. Well, i mean there is no basis in terms of whether the city erred the question of whether Affordable Housing disappears is less of a legal issue. Unfortunately, we seem since ive been on the commission it seems like every two weeks a similar situation a citizen is evicted from their illegal highway but until the board of supervisors takes our advise in april. Around that time. Unfortunately, our the situation to situation whereas, madam president said this doesnt merit the request. This is a little bit different than cases before us that a lot of cases before us are singlefamily dwellings that have not one or worn the legal units down look at the picture of the property this was commercial space and although it is unfortunate i dont believe there is a basis for to grant the jurisdiction request. Anyone. Im in agreement. Ill move to deny the jurisdiction request on the basis there was no action by even though city it caused the requester inform Internal Revenue late thank you on that motion commissioner fung commissioner Vice President honda and commissioner swig that motion carries 4 to zero. Before i call the next item we want to find out if lilly lynn is here or an interpreter for the next item. Okay t the for the next item yes. Okay we had hired on interpreter to come to help with that translate this item but shes are you lilly lynn. Yeah. Okay. Just in time ross those are the people that many say lynn is here to translate for you. Okay. So im calling item 5 appeal lynn wong versus the a penalty for construction work without a permit and we will start with the appellant mr. Wong who has 7 minutes to aid the board you need to come up to the microphone together. To present your case to the board. And actually because we have an interpreter well double the time it will be a total of 14 minutes because of fact were speaking through an interpreter so into the microphone please go forward. speaking foreign language. i speak chinese so i talk to you in chinese i any bedroom has 4 windows. speaking foreign language. yeah total 4 windows 3 of them is leaking water i change it. speaking foreign language. i dont know should i get appointment from the window to fix. Would you speak into the microphone i cant hear you thank you. I total have 4 windows 3 of them is leaking water do i need a permit now a leaking problem. speaking foreign language. right now. speaking foreign language. okay right now i still have my upstairs has a 6 to 8 windows their leaking water do i need to get a permit. speaking foreign language. previously downstairs was living room for students he or she has a lot of opinion regarding to a lot of problem like leaking gas but i dont have leaking gas problem. speaking foreign language. i dont have a leaking gas and then he is unreasonable. speaking foreign language. and then my downstairs has lots of things i called my attorney he asked me to pay 10 hes asking for 10 to 15 thousand dollars. speaking foreign language. this person wants to Say Something if not no fact his purpose to get money back. speaking foreign language. yeah. The person even though wart has mold on the wart and excuseme. I need to repeat last sentence. speaking foreign language. and then talked to accountant after and investigated and the accountant said i need to look at it, it is fine. speaking foreign language. and then the government say i need to bring the wart and i left her not on the wart and open the door but refused to open the door i county get in to speaking foreign language. because the time it limit to the government requested me before the may 29 i need to fix it before that day and after that i need to fix it to it is okay. Right now. speaking foreign language. that person he has no furniture only one bed i give him like a bell or something for him to use he refused to return it to me. speaking foreign language. excuse me. The interpreter for client. speaking foreign language. that person say he say we want to kill my family member. speaking foreign language. and i dont building what that person like thirtyyearold he is very, very bis very, very speaking foreign language. thank you our temporary can tell you about that information. I have a few questions how long has the tenant been in the property. speaking foreign language. he is saying to stay about a few a couple of months and totally about 8 months and since march he didnt pay any rent. Let me back up on that this is the appeal of a penalty for unpermitted work or is this tenant landlord issue. speaking foreign language. i wont yeah. speaking foreign language. i just want to tell you i already make an appointment to fix the window and then previous landlord he said his house only costs thirty thousand and for the property tax only one hundred and 50. speaking foreign language. and downstairs already have open and bedroom i didnt do that. Honk has the owner of this property. speaking foreign language. i bought it in 1996. speaking foreign language. the house is very, very old and the property is very old so it has a lot of holes and the mouse comes through. Thank you, thank you. Thank you. Thank you inspector duffy. You can sit now and well hear in the inspector and theres more time. Commissioners joe duffy dbi the appeal the penalty is the result of the complaint received by dbi around the ninth of march. Inspector duffy hold on i want to make sure your translating this they need to understand this. It was the description of the complainant saying illegal unit and the rental services around march and it was phone calls barbara hale a no entry and around the 25th of march an inspection of the premises and some permit researchers by Housing Inspection Services the 29 of april 2015 a initiation or over a parking garage and a failed inspection of the upper lower and kitchen counters and sing and enclosing it with the kitchen and full bath a tube and sink have been added the permit research failed to produce any permits were issued throughout the building to its present condition and the following codes violations there is various code vacationed proper ventilation and heat source and installed without a wiring permit and back up instruction materials and improper exist egress obstruction the rules of violation was issued by the housing inspection at a time the instruction was to submit a copy and two sets of plans with wants Building Application to legalize the floor occupancy or reinvestor back to the use there was a 9 minds penalty of 5 thousand dollars the value of work to be 5 thousand dollars and that was noigs noigs the value of 1,000 but had a discussion they lowered that to 4 thousand 9 times to 15,000 of work and lastly thousand dollars the subsequent Building Permit during the process it was filed on the cigarette of august and issued and the permit was to comply with the notice of violation with one half bath and replace the walls in the garage with two doors with the fire rated door and remove the kitchen the value of work on that permit was 26,000 during the process of approval on that permit the penalty was put on for 9 times on a value of 5 thousand dollars on the totals penalties assessed by dbi was for one thousand 4. 01 that is where were at here and i would be saying the penalty that dbi wants the 9 times penalty to stay i did not get if the gentleman that owns the property did the work im not clear but i certainly seems fair enough the penalties was fair and if, in fact, they got a reductions of 15 thousand to 5 thousand take that 66 percent of penalty over 3,000 from the penalty stuck so im available to answer any questions i think if i have to expand. The penalty mentioned nothing about windows. Thats a separate issue. Theyre not clear if they need a permit to pay so some appeal the penalty for the work that i mean windows with regards to the windows needs a permit and obviously the building of the unit matters im not sure if this gentleman was responsible for po that but owned it since 1996. His statement says he didnt do the work. He didnt. Thats what his statement says. Our permit if it is done by a previous owner well reduce the penalty in dbi theres a code section it addresses that i dont know it didnt include the penalty by Housing Inspection Services this which is standard procedure sometimes, people appeal those through the deputy could directors or the chief housing inspection not sure they use it is to be honest when im doing these things people came in and got the permit first and did the work im not sure. A side question does an anonymous complaint trigger a certification. Were going by city charter we respond to every complaint and it gets assigned to an inspector do we get in no nonetheless we see a duplicate we know that is something weve looked at recently. Okay. Thank you im sorry other question any Public Comment on this item . Okay. Seeing none then mr. Wong you have 3 minutes of rebuttal if you want to speak again to the board. Public . Is there any rebuttal . Please step forward. I will set the clock for 6 minutes again to double the time. speaking foreign language. before march 29 i already knew the work no good i definitely asked that person to pin the wart he didnt want me to get in. speaking foreign language. i bought everything to painting i still fixing any house i tried to go inside to bring the wall. Im sorry can i interrupt one second so this hearing is for the penalty phase it is not in regards to the tenant landlord dispute so what it is about duty the penalty imposed on him. speaking foreign language. basically is there a reason we shouldnt charge him one thousand dollars. speaking foreign language. i dont understand why you guys give penalty for me thats why i do not understand speaking foreign language. because im online downstairs . speaking foreign language. i living downstairs about two years. speaking foreign language. and then when i left town nothing happen 33 and even my wife emigrated here from china she lived with us downstairs and then nothing happened. speaking foreign language. i know. Can i. Can i maybe he is confused. The reason why he is here and the penalties is caused because there was work performed on his property without the correct permitting. speaking foreign language. he also, they dont speak inclines. Im sorry speaking foreign language. because i dont speak everyone i dont know english were low income family so thats why we bought this every were low income family so thats why we bought thineveryo were low income family so thats why we bought this gleve english were low income family so thats why we bought this ie english were low income family so thats why we bought thishev english were low income family so thats why we bought this ve english were low income family so thats why we bought thieryo english were low income family so thats why we bought thiryon english were low income family so thats why we bought thiyoneh were low income family so thats why we bought thione i d were low income family so thats why we bought thine i do were low income family so thats why we bought this e i d were low income family so thats why we bought this i do were low income family so thats why we bought this speaking foreign language. because we dont speak worker we know to ask forgive permit since we bought a house that is having a bathroom. speaking foreign language. but. We have total 4 people we fixed that problem and lived together. speaking foreign language. yeah. Then we pay like one hundred dollars to fix the problem. speaking foreign language. yeah, we fix yeah, we fix our wall we changed it up the wood and then we can live inside. Okay. When you purposed the property did the realtor speak chinese . speaking foreign language. yes. So it is california state law that everything be disclosed on the properties condition when they purchased the property in the 6 it was explained to them at a time the area and stove and windows and bashl were illegal that is buyer be aware. speaking foreign language. we dont know because we dont know english so thats why when we bought the house i dont know exactly. speaking foreign language. 33 and then we fix the problem and right now your giving me a penalty right now it is unreasonable. speaking foreign language. because of that like the little mouse coming through we tried to fix problem. speaking foreign language. yeah, thats example we try to fix it and and then people tells us you fix it and looks like it is beautiful then people say maybe you try tee rent it out. speaking foreign language. so this is the fact. speaking foreign language. yeah, because we tried to fix the problem and effectually we fixed the problem you guys want to give me the penalty. speaking foreign language. yeah, because we have inside we tried to fix it we just want to live in our home. speaking foreign language. we dont know we need to get a permit who can fix it we dont know english thats why we bought. House. Sorry do they have any children. Children. speaking foreign language. yes. We have 3. Do they speak english. speaking foreign language. they were speaking foreign language. they were born here but they a lot of times they were very, very young they go to school. All right. Is your time up. One is in sacramento. Their college age at this point. speaking foreign language. some say all right graduated and some is in school. Thank you. We need to pay the tuition fee. Can i ask the name of the other speaker please in the other speaker. speaking foreign language. if you could fill out a card for her that would be helpful a speaker card the little card thank you. Sir, is there still time or is it finished . Are you done are they done speaking to the board. speaking foreign language. thats all yeah. We still need to pay for the tuition for our children and then you want to give me the penalties you can that is unreasonable; right . speaking foreign language. yeah in San Francisco a lot of People Living like this asian and a lot of people are low income families. Yeah. I feel it is unreasonable yeah. speaking foreign language. yeah, because in person right now they shouldnt he was a chiropractor he come to our place twice to ask for living. Thank you your time is up. Inspector duffy a rebuttal . Sorry commissioners not too much to add it appears someone acted to get the permit the description if there were a sets of plans that would have been better for the agent to pull the permit and explain that better to them im not sure the total fees 2 thousand plus the penalty is only one thousand theyre making one hundred dollars theyre appropriately assessed so it is difficult with the understanding the vision and is penalty im not sure that everybody they understand it but it says someone acted on their on behalf of to comply to the notice of violation so i dont think it is those folks maybe if that person had of been here. That was the 10,000. Sorry. Possibly. Yes. Your probability right. May we ask them the owner who i agree may we ask them who is professional who that was that might have been easier. I didnt say it was the second part as i said the discussion somewhere along the line 9 times reduced to someone had that discussion with dbi we dont do that nonetheless you come in and sit down and have that conversation. So its been reduced already. I saw on the housing nose on complaints there was a reduction from 9 time to 15 to 9 times and 5 i dont think that was those people but who was getting the permit. I believe the patents son that came to file the appeal but not able to attend oh, sorry. Hes here. laughter . Kind of too late are theyre questions for him. Can you step to the podium please. I wish you would have dove in there earlier, you heard the explanation theyre basically here because a certifying so we listened to for the last 20 minutes is a tenant landlord dispute. I saw the drawings i put everything i did that because my parents couldnt afford an architect. A couple of questions so when they bought the property the inlaw unit was present correct. Based on the case i dont remember what they told me is what i know. What it rent during that time. No, it was not. Vacant the whole time. My moms mom came from china. This was the first time that was rented with that tenant and yes. And your tennis to remove the illegal unit. Yeah. They cant afford they spoke to 3 contractors i spoke to them and they gave us bids from 60 to 100,000. Do you know because of the new legislation that was enacted of october of 2014 i can add a noncommon but once you roach you it you cant readd. My parents cant say take out a loan we attempted to fill out the legalization form but due to the cost and that we have to hire an architect i cannot do the drawings and have to hire another contractor for electrical and one more plumbing and one inform some other things it is too expensive. The other thing looking at the paper paperwork that was submitted the department of building inspection has reduces is penalties i understand your parents are limited english when they purchased the property in the 6 their realtor spoke inclines at this point it it was dlordz that was an illegal unit and if it was not disclosed you should bring up that paperwork with that realtor. I tried to do before i tried to get the drawings we have this report i attempted to pull when i tried to pull the report you cant read it, it is for the legible at all what i looked at the drawings that was a 27 unit apartment. Anyone else have any questions. Please state your name for the record. Kenny wang. Commissioners unless other questions commissioners, the matter is submitted. I guess ill start unfortunate situation we are now going to lose oath affordable unit in the city but i think that the department of building inspection looking at the paperwork has bebeen very fair in their estimation of the fees that were charged unless other comments the amount is a fair. Ill probably disagree with that a little bit the history of our decisions in these types of cases normal from the Property Owner did not install it then we give them some latitude and break on this the question in this case is that i accept what they said in terms of not renting it for that many years they started to rent is that created other issues for them so there was income generation but since they didnt do it ill recommend perhaps we reduce it to 5 times instead of 9 times. I agree with commissioner fung question. Move to grant the appeal and to reduce the penalties to 5 times. Thats 5 times the permit fee on the Commission Motion to grant the appeal and reduce the penalties to 5 times the permit fee on the basis it was done by a prior owner. Yes. It is based on the reduced valuation permit fee. The reason for reducing it is what im asking. Yes. Mr. Duffy you want to correct any math . Sorry commissioners just normally the penalty is 9 times the penalties of the work performed well reduce to 5 times not the permit fee the proper you know theres fees that are correctly assessed. Thats correct. So it is 9 5 times the penalty. Yeah. On the penalty yeah. So commissioner fung im asking for the basis of that reduction the reason. On the basis they did not create the unpermitted work. I notice one more thing to the presidios that i heard some financial stuff being spoken they cant afford it this work needs to get done to contrary the notice of violation or more costs there are will be a hearing and assessment costs i hope maybe i can pertain that to them but it is important they follow through and get a final inspection so it didnt get more expensive. Can we, huh . Can you give us a calculation from the penalty is currently sitting at. One thousand. One thousand. So this will approximately go 6 hundred. Yes. Be clear on that i agree with our advise and given there is their son is in the room and he seems to be an intelligent young man and does things i dont know how to do i highly recommend he provides council to his parents with our good advice and speak to the son. Okay. Who will understand. Thank you, commissioners. We have a motion from commissioner fung to reduce the penalty to 5 times of the value performed commissioner president lazarus commissioner Vice President honda and commissioner swig okay that motion carries move on to item 6 appeal elizabeth sale and matthew versus the department of public works on ninth avenue protesting the network of inc. For a wireless box for a construction of the wireless facility that was heard on october 7, 2015, and continued by the board to allow the time for the notification materials and commissioner president lazarus i was going to ask if you want to hear from the Department First and hear from the presidios and the appellant. Yes. And so starting with ms. Short. Are the appellants here. I dont know. Are the appellants heeler ms. Sale and mr. Gaffe new. Good evening carli short public works i dont have anything to add im available to answer any questions well, i duo have one thing to add we have proposed a revised order that would require notification on both those in the future we felt the proper notification was done in this case ill be happy to answer any questions. Was it the materials. They provided. Im sorry. It is yeah. Okay. Thank you. Okay and congratulations again. Mr. Fineman. 3 minutes. Hi good evening madam president and honorable members of the board of the appeals im Martin Fineman on behalf of the castle west known in the paperwork and a as the network of california and that entities it the permit holder the permit was properly grandstanded pursuant to article 25 of the code and the regulations under that implementing that part of public works codes as you may know the protest was filed and heard and denied and final approval was given of this permit and an appeal was taken up a few weeks ago as ms. Goldstein mentions and the matter put over for today to allow the department of public works to submit prove that proper notice was given the department of public works did provide that documentation to the board on october 13th 2015 as to the merits of that case, i would note i guess its been noted the appellants are not presents that is consistent with the fact that although they filed an appeal not a brief in support of the appeal prior to the last hearing nor in other papers in between the only ground that was mentions in that onepackage document the original notice of appeal was concerns about radio frequency emissions the board is aware and bryan indicated to the board singles the prior hearing at the time of the prior hearing federal law and specifically refer to section