I am julie rosenberg, the boards executive director. We will be joined by representatives from the City Departments that have cases before the board this even. We expect Scott Sanchez, also representing the Planning Department and valley lopez, deputy City Attorney representing the department of Public Health. The meeting guidelines are as follows. Turn off or silence phone and other Electronic Devices so they will not disturb the proceedings. Carry on conversations in the hallway. The rules of presentation are as follows. Appellants, permit holders and department responders are each given 7 minutes to present the case and 3 minutes for rebuttal. People affiliated with the parties must include the comments within the seven or three minute periods. Members of the public who are not affiliated have three minutes and no rebuttal. Please speak into the microphone. For continued cases, they get 3 minutes each with no rebuttal. To i assist in the board accurate presentation, you are asked but not required to submit a speaker card. Speaker cards are available on the left side of the podium. Four votes are required to grant an appeal. Please note that the board reserves the right not to call an item after 10 00 p. M. The board rules or hearing schedules, speak to board stuff during the break, after the meeting or call or visit the office. We are at 1650 mission street. And forecast live and will be rebroadcast on fridays at 4 00 p. M. On channel 26. The video is available on our website and can be downloaded from sfgov tv. Org. Now we will swear in and affirm any of those who wish to testify. Any member of the public can speak pursuant to the rights of the sunshine ordinance. If you intend to testify and have the board give evidentiary weight, stand if you are able and raise your right hand and say i do. Whoever is here to give testimony, please rise. Do you swear or affirm the testimony you give will be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth . Thank you. Please be seated. Commissioners, we have two housekeeping item. The party for number 4 have requested the matter be continued to december 4 for settlement discussions. Given that the item is on the published agenda, we need a vote to continue that matter. Move to continue item four to december. Okay. December 4. We have a motion from commissioner lazarus to move, to continue this item to december 4. Is there any Public Comment on that motion . O okay. Seeing none, commissioner honda . Aye. Commissioner tan sner aye. Commissioner swig. That carries 40. The other housekeeping item is item nine, 19065. The parties have requested the board move the appeal to the boards indefinite calendar, the call of the chair, to allow more time to continue settlement efforts. Again, we do need a vote. So moved. We have a motion from Vice President lazarus to move that to call of the chair. Is there any Public Comment on that item . On that motion, commissioner darryl honda . And is this big file to carry and now he is cancelling it . Oh my goodness. Aye. Maybe. Aye. Okay. Commissioner tanner . Aye. A president swig . An aye. That motion carries 40. And that item is moved to call of the chair. I think we should give it to the counselor to bring the files in the next time when he comes in. Okay. Thank you. Now we are on item one which is general Public Comment. This is an opportunity for anyone who would like to speak on a matter within the boards jurisdiction but that is not on tonights calendar. Is there anyone here for general Public Comment . Okay. If you can move forward, sir. Good evening. Outside counsel for Verizon Wireless. I wanted to come personally to give you a hard copy of the letter that we committed earlier today to the board regarding testimony you heard last week about work being done prematurely on Verizon Wireless project, which is an appeal that will be heard before you in november. We took that concern very seriously and investigated the pole that night. And we determined that work had not been done by Verizon Wireless or by motives and work had been done by pg e under a separate permit granted and specified the period of time for pg e is october 14 between 8 00 and 2 30. The pg e permit calls for pole maintenance and they did pole maintenance and in addition put a 6 foot bayonet on top of the pole which is their right to do under the California PublicUtility Commission regulations. They can replace the pole or put those sorts of things up under their authority. Clearly, the timing wasnt helpful for us, but again, this was in pg es purview. Tonight i will find out whether i have power tonight from pg e. They run their calendar and establish their schedules. The work done on the 14th was over two months after the permit was originally issued and they must have a schedule to do that. There is no work done by Verizon Wireless and modus and we will allow you to review the equipment and radios should it be approved, but presently, there is a 6foot wooden piece on top of the pole that pg e placed on october 14. We submitted copies of the permit himself and are in the letter here. As this is not on agenda, we will accept that note as part of your brief in november please. Okay. Thank you. President swig and thank you for clearing that up. Thank you. Next speaker please. Good evening and welcome. I am the director of operations for multiple companies and we manage 72 glous street which includes brazilian steakhouse. I wanted to give the board a little bit of an update. We received a notice of violation related to smoke and odor emissions from the restaurant. That appeal they appealed the violation and that was granted because we had opened a permit already to install a new system on the roof. That permit has not yet been opened, but i just want to give you an update on what is going on with that. We ordered a new system as soon as we had our meeting. We didnt wait for the permit to be opened. We ordered the new system and are placing it on the roof. It was manufactured at a 12week time and has been shipped. Or its being shipped from texas. We expect it to arrive on november 8. And we are fully prepared to install the system on the roof of the restaurant before thanksgiving, so that is our goal. We want to do it before thanksgiving because there is a moratorium on cranes between thanksgiving and new years. So if we cant get the permit before then, it will be the first week of january. The issue with the permit needs to clear through two the two different departments, the Fire Department and department of Public Health. And go to d. P. H. And Fire Department has some comments. We are working to address the comments and i acknowledge there is some delay in getting a response to the Fire Department. However, there was some unusual circumstances prior to that that the Fire Department required as bill plans for the kitchen. We didnt own the property when the restaurant opened up and had to make those from scratch. And secondly, a field permit was required and we have to submit drawings for that as well. Thirdly t subcontractor going the life safety portion of the job had a Major Medical issue. And we have another representative from that company taking over, but they kind of had to start from scratch. Were working on that. The system has been ordered and we hope to get it installed as soon as possible and we apologize for the delay. Were working on it as hard as we can. Thank you. I have a letter to submit as well. Thank you for clearing that up because that came up under Public Comment last week. That was expeditious to do so. And also understanding when you were before the body last year, there was no specifications really regarding the equipment that was going to be put on the roof from d. P. H. And i understand that there was some jockeying to get that done. I appreciate you coming before and informing us. We really want to get this done. Thank you. Thank you. Is there any other general Public Comment . Okay. Seeing none, we will move on to item 2, commissioner comments and questions. Commissioners . Nope. Okay. We will now move on to item three before you for discussion, possible adoption an the minutes of the october 16, 2019 board meeting. Commissioners, any comments . Nope. Is there a motion . We have a motion from Vice President lazarus to adopt the october 16, 2019 minutes. Is there any Public Comment on that item . Okay. Seeing none, on that motion, commissioner honda . Aye. Commissioner tanner . Aye. A president swig . That motion careys 40. The minutes are adopted. We are now moving on to item number five. This is appeal 19 o 31. Paul oltranti and the estate of flora oltranti, 1794 filbert street appealing the denial on march 27 to paul oltranti of the site permit, add new floor to existing twostory building, move one residential unit on first floor to new third floor, add new garage t a first floor. Remodel two units on second floor and commercial space at first floor. Add space at rear at first and second floors and light rails, and siding, win dose, roof, and elevator. The permit was disapprove by the Planning Commission upon determination that exceptional and extraordinary circumstances exist regarding the proposed project in that it would not contribute to the retention of the existing Housing Stock and that the proposed top floor unit would be out of scale and would not be considered aforeign policiable. See discretionary review action memo 639. This was permit 2016 09 27 89 15. And note on september 11, the board voted 401 to continue the matter to october 23, 20109 so the Planning Department can work with the project sponsor on revised plans that are code compliant to include an accessory dwelling unit on the ground floor. If the board grants this, this constitutes the approval action for the project and purposes of ceqa and as a preliminary matter, commissioner tanner, have you had the opportunity to review the materials and the video for the hearing which took place on september 11 . Yes, i have. Thank you. So we will now hear from the appellant first. Good evening and welcome. Good evening, commissioners. As ms. Rosenberg said this, matter was heard on september 11, and we presented at that time a project that was revised from the one denied by the Planning Commission to address the issued raised by them. You seem inclined with the direction of the designs and wanted to send it back for us to review with planning and ensure code compliance. We have done that and made a few additional revisions which were reviewed by the Planning Department staff. And some of those including reducing bay windows to code compliant and eliminated one of the windows in the rear yard area, and therefore would have require advair yans. We relocated the entry to the proposed a. D. U. To directly access from the street instead of going through the residential lobby. And there was some design window modifications and other Design Materials and materials that were presented and reviewed and blessed by the Planning Department staff. The staff also initiated the review of the proposed accessory dwelling unit and the Zoning Administrator issued an action memo stating we needed waivers for density and for open space. And administratively approving those. They went back did the ceqa determination to determine it was considered exempt and presented revised demolition calculations that were reviewed and blessed and included in the site plans we submitted with our short letter. One thing about the plans is as i was preparing for the hearing, there was some small changes that mr. Sanchez had asked for, and for whatever reason, those changes were made but the set of plans that are included in our letter did not include those small changes. They were really just changing the unit designations and i gave mr. Sanchez a copy and i have a copy of the accurate set here. None of the design changes are different from what was presented to you, but i want to make sure we have the accurate set of plans as requested by planning in the record so i can submit this or present it to whomever as necessary. Just make sure mr. Sanchez has it. A he does. With that, i request you approve the project as revised for the reasons we stated before. We believe it addresses the concerns of the Planning Commission and adds rental housing to the citys Housing Stock. And is well supported by the neighborhood. And we just respectfully request you approve as presented. The architect is here if you have questions about the design details and the owners as well. Thank you. Commissioner honda thank you. Thank you. Mr. Sanchez . Thank you. Good evening, president swig, members of the board, Scott Sanchez. I will focus on the comments that the board gave at last hearing and to give you the alternative. I wont try to sway you in the wisdom of the Planning Commission, but i appreciate the diligent work and quick responsiveness of the appellant and they did address all the concerns and comments we had with regard to the additional a. D. U. The project has been revised to be code complaint. They have addressed the demolition calculations which have been raised at the Public Comment in the previous hearing. We have issued the memo as necessary for authorizing the a. D. U. And updated the categorical exemption and the Environmental Review document to reflect the revised scope of work for the project. Given that it was denied by the Planning Commission which action if the board does overturn the denial, this would be the first approval action for the purposes of the Environmental Review. And i do appreciate this has been a resolution in this matter that allows it to move forward, but i do hope that we dont have a host of these moving forward where a project that is denied at the Planning Commission and then substantially revised before this body to add a. D. U. And other things. We should have a complete scope of work and the complete project at the Planning Commission. And it is much more challenging to address the a. D. U. S and add them at this late stage in the process. We were able to do it here. But it is not something i think that is the most efficient and effective or appropriate process. Everything has been done in this case to allow the a. D. U. , but we hope for future other cases, and nothing to do with this appellant, and other cases as they move forward, they dont attempt to try to get something through the Planning Commission, have it denied, and have a better luck or Better Commission at the board here by making late changes to the project. I dont think that was the intent of the appellant here, but as you remember, there was another case and i think three denials that night that you heard it and another case had a similar offer to add an a. D. Or maybe not. Better to get that done earlier on in the process. We are good to go for this case. Commissioner honda the kitchen that wasnt installed . That is a different one. President swig in blunt term, you dont want the Planning Commission and the Planning Commission should be responsible for doing their job that they have to be given the tools and with all respect to do their job, and that would be a full set of plans. These are great addition. A. D. U. S are additions to projects, but we ask that be done at the time of the Planning Commission hearing and some discussion with this case and this is maybe a bit unique. But for cases in the future, we dont want to set a precedence. President swig not pertaining to this case, but we should stay with this case, do you have a suggestion of a protocol with regard to your very good suggestion . Should we simply deny cases that substantially change their plans . Or we do that internally in the Planning Department where you will suggest strongly they go back to the Planning Commission with the set of plans they should have gone with in the first place . A by the time it gets to that point where if its been denied and by the Planning Commission and appealed, then it is before this board, this board has jurisdiction. So it is up to this board how to proceed. We are asking from the Department Level that the board take into consideration the fact that it is more problematic to add at a. D. U. S this late. There was another project that night where i think an a. D. U. Was discussed and the board properly upheld the denial on that matter. And they can be applied and go through the process for the new project if they want to propose now. But in that case i think the board made the right decision, and in this case, it is also a good decision with the end result. We dont want it to be a pattern. President swig thank you. Mr. Sanchez . Happy birthday to your son milo. Can you confirm that the plans that he gave to us are the plans that