Separate do you deputy Zoning Administrator. We also have joseph duffy, senior building inspector representing the department of building inspections. The Board Meeting guidelines are as follows. The board request that you turn off or silence all phones and other Electronic Devices so they will not disturb the proceedings please carry on conversations in the hallway. Appellant appellants, permit holders, and Department Respondents are given seven minutes to present their case in three minutes for rebuttal. People affiliated with these parties must include these comments within the seven or three minute period. Members of the public were not affiliated have up to three minutes each to address the board and no rebuttal. Please speak into the microphone for rehearing and jurisdiction request, the parties have three minutes each with no rebuttal. To assist the board and accurate preparation of minutes, you are asked not required to cement a speaker carter Business Card to staff when you co
I believe that statistics and ill check with robin, over 43 . 43 at stewart hall. And i think 40 at Convent High School and then, i dont have specifics but its in the mid20 at the elementary. Thats total. Percentage . The percentage relates to total students of colour . Yes. Commissiocommissioner moore . Thank you. This made the school not just a document but real as part of this community, including the importance of the people it shapes. Im in strong support and make a motion that we approve this condition together with a modification of the meeting at an enrollment cap of 1,000 is reached. Second. Commissioner moore, could you please repeat the amended part of the motion, the amended commissions . Could you repeat them, please. That we encourage to make part of the motion a special meeting when the enrollment cap of 1,000 students is being reached. Thank you. On that motion, then, commissioners, to approve this matter with conditions as have been amended and read into the record, co
Again, we would like to have this permitted before, the appeal denied. If you have any questions i would be happy to answer them. I have a question. First of all, your brief was well laid out in response to the appellants brief, what youve done, what you plan to do. You mentioned that the owner, contractor has been doing business in San Francisco, knows the permit is from modesto. The contractor is not the owner, but the contractor is from modesto but works in San Francisco. A handful of other projects currently Going Forward. I think the reference by appellants counsel was not the contractors working on other projects, not the owner. And then, the last question was, goodness, i forgot. Thats it. Thank you. Thank you. We will now hear from mr. Mr. Duffy. Commissioners, joe duffy, dbi. A lot of paperwork on this one. We will start with the permits, im sorry the permit that is under appeal, the kitchen and bathroom, three apartment units, no change to existing layouts, units 821, 825, 82
We expect commissioner moore to arrive shortly. Commissioners, first is consideration of items for continuous, 201500258cua at hamilton avenue. Conditional use authorization proposed until november 7th, 2019. I have to other items for continuance. Any members that would like to comment on items proposed for continuance . Seeing none, Public Comment is closed. Commissioner hillace . Moved to continue. Seconded. Move to continue to november 7th. The motion passes 40. That places under the consent calendar for item 2, case 202 2, cua, 21 avenue. Any member who would like to pull this avenue out for consent . Commissioners . Commissioner hillace . Approve. Second. Item two under consent calendar. roll call . So moved and that motion passes unanimously 40, placing us under commission matters 3, consideration of Adoption Draft minutes for august 29, 2019. Are there any members of the public that would like to comment on draft minutes . Seeing none, Public Comment is closed, commissioner john
Discussing with them, doing this very project since january of 2019. That it has been in discussions with their predecessors since 2016. This has been a project that has been in the works four years. And whatever happened in 2018 is irrelevant to what is happening before the board tonight. Once the discussion started, once the requesters were well on notice by that mr. Rice was going to do this, they did nothing to protect their own Property Rights and they failed to appeal the permit within 60 days. So that is the only question before the board tonight, but if we are to address the merits at all, which im not sure that is even appropriate, the requesters have made all source of arguments based on assumptions, based on irrelevant matters, for instance, they made the assumption that the permit was issued improperly or that mr. Rice failed to tell the Building Department what his status is in terms of his ownership and where he actually lives. All that is untrue. He did tell the Building