Transcripts For SFGTV Board 20240703

Meeting of the board of appeals. President rick swig will preside special joined by commissioner trasvina and commissioner eppler we expect lemberg shortly. Lopez is absent. Present is jan huber provide needed legal advice. Im julie rosenberg. We be joined by represent fist the City Departments presented before the board this evening. Tina tammy the deputy za representing planning. Pregnantue green, Deputy Director for dbi and henley lip ton with Public Comment and Jeanine Young Senior Health inspector with to baca motor vehicling public with Public Health. The board request you silence all phones and electronics so they will in the disturg proceedings no eating or drinking. Appellates permit holders and respondents begin 7 minutes to present and low minutes rebuttal. People affiliated with them must include comments within those periods. Members not afill i didnt individual 3 minutes time may be limited to 2 minute fist the agenda is long or a lot of speakers. Our legal assistant will give you a verbal warning 30 seconds before your time is up. 4 votes are needed grant a request. If you have i rehearing or schedules e mill the board staff. Public access and participation are of americans. Sfgovtv is broadcast and streaming live and we will have the 8 to receive Public Comment for each item on the agenda. Sfgovtv is providing closed captioning. To watch it on tv go to channel 78. Tell be rebroadcast on fridays a 4 p. M. On channel 26 a link is sfgov. Org boa. Comment westbound provide in the 3 ways. In person. I have zoom. Go to the website cling on hearing and zoom link call 6699006833 and enter access code 859 5349 5910 sfgovtv is grauking and streaming instructions on the bottom of the screen. To block your number when call nothing dial star scent then the phone number. Listen for the Public Comment portion and dial star 9 which equals raising your hand. You will be brought in the hearing room when it is your turn. Dial star 6 to unmute yourself. You will have 23 minutes. Our legal assistant will provide you a verbal warning 30 seconds before where you are time is us. There is a delay in live and what is broadcast. It is important that people call nothing reduce or turn off volumes or well is interference. If any of the participates are attendsees on zoom need a disability accommendation oh assistant you can make a question in the chat box. Or sfgov. Org it conditional be used for Public Comment or pregnancy. We will take Public Comment first from members present here. Now, we will wear in or affirm those who intend to testify. Any member may speak without an oath pursuant to the sunshine ordinance if you intend to testify tonight and wish to have the board give your testimony weight raise your right hand and say, i do after sworn in. Do you wear that the testimony you will give will be the truth and nothing but the truth . Thank you. If you are a participate and not speak put your speaker on mute. Commissioners we have one change in the order of the agenda. Approved by president swig after the item 3 the adoption of minutes we will hear item 7 at 1369 san bruno. Well you in move on to item 1 yes or no Public Comment. An opportunity for anyone who would like to speak within the boards jurisdiction but not on tonights agenda. Is well a member of the public who wishes to speak, raise your hand. I dont see anybody on zoom. Well move on to item 2. Commissioner comment and questions . Anybody w have comments. Commissioner trasvina. As noted in the minutes we had previously members taxi drivers who have come before us and testified regarding retaliation concerns and a previous meeting i asked the City Attorney what protections there are for individuals when have this concern. And i believe our deputy City Attorney has locked into it and is providing is able to spond tent and i ask that she do so happy to do this. So with respect to retaliation someone believes they have been retelliated against by city officer or employee for exercising their rows to bring an appeal before the board, than i can file a report with the city Whistle Blower Program administrated by the controllers office. City staff will investigate the report and ensure this corrective actions are taken. With respect to someone alleged retaliated fwens by noncity official, that would not fall under the boards appeals in general city protections. Which was a question raised by commissioner trasvina. This boards jurisdiction is limited by the city charttory concur nothing or overruling the actions of departments. So retality yagdz by a private individual would fall outside of the purview of the city and this board is defined by the charter or general city protections. In the case of retaliation by private citizen, someone would need to look elsewhere for a remedy or forum to complain. The rent board for a landlord dispute or civil court if the conduct gives rise to an independent cause of action. Thank you. Thank you for informing the public. Anybody else . Okay. Is well public ment on this item. Raise your hand. I dont see any Public Comments we move on to item athlete adoption of minutes. Commissioners, before you for discussion and possible adoption the minutes of september 27, 23 meeting. Commissioners . Anybody want to make a motion or have corrections to the minutes . Commissioner eppler. I move we adopt the minutes. Thank you. Is there Public Comment . Seeing none on the motion to adopt the minutes commissioner trasvina. Yes commissioner lemberg. Why aye. President swig. Aye that carries 40 and adopted. We are going to move on to item 7 a change in order of the agenda this. Is appeal 23039 grace bacigalupi against the za issuance autopsying 10 of 23 grace bacigalupi a letter of determination the existing parking space of the front of the property is a legal parking space but the garage building removed and fence between street and space does in the provide screening a Building Permit must have filed to provide adequate screening this is Record Number 2023004009 and we will hear from the appellate first. Welcome. You have 7 minutes. Im grace bacigalupi my husband and i live at 3363 shared with 1367 for 33 years and last year the end of the year, a complaint was made about our driveway. That is at 1367. Which has been there many years but the complaint was that it appeared to be abandoned or illegal. And so what i brought was photos that things over the years to show you how long it has been that way. In 2000 the garage was dill anidated and it started to lean after storms and went to the Building Department to apply for an permit to rebuild it but they did not like it on several visits said no this is not a good plan. This you have. And we were told this if we built a fence 72 inches or less woad not require a permit. Thats what we did. 23 years ago. Nobody complained about the driveway or fence since then and i have photographs to show you. You can put them on the over head. Yes. We see. Move the microphone. This is the sand born map of 1919 and a picture of the house. An arrow that shows you a tiny little space that was garage. Can you zoom out a bit. This is a zoomed in version. I got the map from planning in 2016 when they were out looking at our house another issue. And there is a garage. The tiny square that you see here we need to wareroom out a little. This is where i keep our garbage cans and things like that. And once the garage fell over we could not there was nothing to protect that part of the property. So we put up the fence and this is an old picture of the garage. Thats my fatherinlaw from 1950. And the young man is a teen year in 1960 you seat garage and a fence there and fence on the other side. So we did was put up the 72 inch fence. With an opening where the garage was. You could fit a car in. We dont use it often thats had we did in 2000 and nobody said we couldnt and not a permit would not be required this is a zoning letter i got from planning in 2016. Than i had seen our property, they had seen what it looked like and the fence that is currently well. There was in complaints at this time. Receipt for a driveway red curb to keep people from parking in the driveway. In 2018. We were using it at that time as a driveway. This is later in 2017, repaired the cement. On the sidewalk outside. For dpw. Than i saw the fence and the screening that was in place at this time and there were not complaint in 2020, we repaired another couple of spaces and you can see a car in the driveway. No one complain body this screening or the way the fence looked then. This is an all right of determination i got and suggested that it was willing had the garage was there but not willing now unless we obtain a permit. Why i need a permit i didnt understand and i reached out to more than a couple people at the Planning Department and did in the get an answer except for this a copy definition of code 142. I read code 142. And i believe that i met all the criteria in code 142. Im not sure why i would need to obtain a permit to i couldnt get a series answer about what was wrong with the screening. From anybody at planning. And so i filed for the appeal. I believe i met criteria in code 142. This is the driveway today. And thats green screening they use around tennis courts. I thought it was good screening. Meets criteria in code 142. And here is the driveway the car inside. This is up close. Material. This is me standing behind the screen. You cant see that is but you see my hands and feet. It is not you cant see the vehicles on the other side of the screen. I noticed that some of the other driveway in my neighborhood this is the driveway at [inaudible]. Right well. Than i have the same material on their fence i took a picture. This is a school on bryant street. Near my house the exact same material. And her another school on 20th street they use that material to hide their trash cans. It is the same material. Another school down the street, bryant street school. But not on bryant street it is san bruno it is the same material i have on mine. And another school. Down the street from us and that is also has the same material. I brought these pictures. I would like to give you this packet of information that i made up. And i will let you decide. Thank you. President swig. Did you want to accept her pictures we have seen enough and it islet for that. We got a full presentation. Why we have a question prosecute commissioner trasvina thank you. Mrs. Bacigalupi. I have a question. Im confeuds how you got here. Can you explain to me why you south a letter of determination. I was confused it was not clear what they wanted i called and left messages i e mailed on several occasions and nobody could tell mow what was wrong with the screening on my fence. And time was passing i roached out to alex and he said give them a chance see if member will wants to hum resolve this i was happy to do this i did it the day after i got the letter im confused why do i need a permit for the fence that has been there for 23 years or the green screening. Right. If i could, though, it seems to me you are a longterm San Francisco and willing to do what the city wants to you do guarding. Yea. Yea. I thought i did. I wonder how the letter of determination came up. Asking and getting. Dpw they received an unanimous complaint to suggesting this was an illegal driveway and i said i got this sand born map from 1909 there was a driveway there when we move in the. We did not put it there. I mean there is prove that has been there for a long time. Did you ask for specific low a letter of determinationo. The legality. Had do i mode to do. I just said it is a legal or isnt it thats what dpw said than i wanted to wait for plan to tell them. And i reached out to planning i did it observe in 2016 about this same property. And i assumed they had all that information. From 2016 nobody had a problem with the driveway at this time and the way it looked or the fence and screening there in 2016. Okay. Do you know whether or not planning or anyone from the city has seen your concern fencing and said it is inadequate. They said the screening was inadequate the the end of the let illegal when the grand jury was there. But the current screening appear to be inadequate. And suggested this i get a permit. For what i i dont know. I apply for a permit. And when i called and e mailed nobody got back to me. Nobody said you should try this or no that fence is not. And i started around my neighborhood. The same material. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. You can be seated we will hear from the Planning Department. Good evening president wig and the board im tina tammy deputy zoning add administrator. 1367 is 1 and 2 story Single Family dwell nothing rh2 zoning. The appellate is grace bacigalupi. The owner of the property. Grace filed an appeal to the letter of determination issued by the za on august 10, 2023. This determination letter was issued at the request of grace because he wanted to know if the concern parking situation at 1367 san bruno is legal or not. As referenced her pace located at the front of her property is legal. However the fence is not. Pursuant to planning code section 142 off Street Parking must be screened from public streets andaly when not enclosed within a building. Typical examples used includes solid or decorative fencing or gates. While grace has a legal parking space, her fence which is more than 3 feet in height required a permit. Through permit research on the property no permit was found. By graces admission the fence was installed after her within story was demo in the 2001. Parking is not required, at least now. Grace had have a park nothing front of her house because the area in front is considered the buildable area of her lot. To comply with the planning code grace needs a permit in the Planning Department needs to rerue it to make sure adequate screening of the space. Thats all the zoning add administrator had tried say in this all right of determinationch the letter did in the represent an error in interpretation of the planning code nor, bus in discretion by the za, the Department Requests that the board deny the appeal and uphold the all right of determinationch thank you. We have a request from president swig. Run through this quickly. I saw this. Things this should have been handled in the department and in the in front of us. This is up there. How tall is the fence . I dont have plans she did not mitt a permit or drawings from the photograph im guessing about 5 and a half feet . Is a permit require when is one required for a fence . Required for that is more than 3 feet. 3 or 3 or more at the front. Thanks. So she was told Something Different and put up a fence. And so is had would this fence be otherwise legal in your view had she got a permit and if so, can the department retroactively issue a permit as we have seen done many times for far more stranger reasons. Absolutely we approve fences over the counter often. We have to check for compatibility with the design guide lines. I dont know the specifics about her materials for her fence. It has been up for decades. This is the sillness. I understand well is no permit. It has been there for 30 years. A 7 foot fence that from the street looks like every other 7 foot fence. What are we doing here. How can we handle this for this citizen in the most efficient fashion as she tried to out reach and get it done yet somebody has in the returned call to simply say you got a fence, yes, you put it up without a permit lets get one and then answer the simple question, is what is the appropriate materials it use to do the adequate screening. Would that be a simple as pie. I believe so she needs to file a permit. And that permit will be assigned a planner. At counter or somebody working with her already i believe well is a planner who has been talking to her i know she said, otherwise there has been a planner. You will provide her that am name the end of the hearing. I can do this. And what about the screening . The screening may not be adequate in the eyes of the department or the best case but when you walk around the neighborhood she had and looks at publicly owned buildings that are owned by the city, and good enough for the 4 schools why in the for my fence . Looks like some parts may be okay the wrought iron fence we see in residential neighborhoods. There is also other elements she has some sort of netting or Green Tennis Court material show dem strit in the her over head for School Properties in the sure they are compresident able with residential this is not part of the letter what review once the permit is filed. In the interest of providing information to the appellate, it may be the green tennis fence is good for schools and play grounds and other snushlal public fences butt residential design guide lines may not be transferrable may need Something Different and get this from the individual you will provide that. Thats correct. Okay. I think i dont know why this was not resolved earlier im trying my darnedest to get had quickly as possible for a simple item. Thank you for your answers do you have anything to add to that . For me . I dont. Commissioner trasvina. Thank you, president swig i share your view and analysis of this. Im not sure yet member of the public had to go through all this. When it seems like she was willing to do what to comply wanted know what it was. But so on the letter of determination. As i read the first paragraph of page 2 does not require the screening in the circumstance. Shouldnt this be a period and say sincerely planning does not require it. Why is there anything else passed . In the letter . The last sentence in the first paragraph on page 2 reads section within fro does in the strict low require the screening in this circumstance past practice hen to do so. Is this the. I thought the citizens are obligated to follow the code in the section. Here in the letter saying the section does not require it. I think that is the end of the story. Is this issage interpretation of the code done in 2000. My reading of the code that is publish the says screening required for all vehicles that is not within a building. From all viewpoints of street and alley. We are talking about the august 2023 letter that says, not strict low required under 142 and the letter guess on to say 142 requires screening within a build nothing rear yards and other interior areas. So, which is this . Is it not within the building. Why would 12242 alie to this part of her property . My understanding is this she does have to comply i cant explain the sentence at the end of the paragraph my understanding is parking screening for parking is required on the property that is in the within the enclosed building. Right but the letter does not say this. I foal for this member of the public who seeks advice. Somehow, gets in the letter of determination. She requested it. Because of the fact that they were a number of complainted filed on her property including the curb cut. And another department i believe public wsmented to know and confirm with the city. Planning is that curb cut was a legal curb cut it would provide access to parking on her property. Thats not in this letter. Thats the back one she provide in the her presentation. The letter of determination process cost anybody anything . It does. It is something she elected to do not required for her to do. She chose to she want today in writing appealable. Okay. And the picture she showed us appeared cover block the view of what was inside the beyond the fence. And doesnt this comply with the code of fully screening . The net comply with adequate screening. Jot picture she showed us was from the street the screening and her behind the screening and you could see when she puts her hands up you see. Right. Is this an example of fully screening from the street. There were photos we have in the file that shows the vehicle that is parked in the parking space in the evening where the lights were turnod you seat parking of the vehicle. It was still visible. Llow the netting the screening im not sure that you call it. You said at night. There was photographs taken in the may be in the early evening. Where it is door was closed or gate was closed and you seat vehicle behind temperature some aspects. I hope nobody from the city is getting over time to take pictures. In they were provided from the applicant. Thank you. President swig. One more i want to get this thing resolved. We have rebuttal. If we if we uphold the appeal and find for the appellate what happens . She abouts to get a permit to affirm that the fence is okay and get affirmation he has to change the o pasty of the fence or not . This is just i letter of determination not the perimism right. Talking about the determination made by the Zoning Administrator in his reading of the planning code whether a permit is required for a fence. Yes. And is the parking legal or not. We are saying yes but you need adequate screening. If we dedeny the appeal thats what she has to do a permit for a fence that was built that is okay and may be part of that, the planner whos name you provide to bacigalupi will determine what material she has to use. If we deny the peel if we uphold the appeal what im seeing is that the upon fence is still legal. Shell get an nov. But you gotta get a permit. So the best thing we do to move this along is to deny her appeal we will make and you will give mrs. Bacigalupi the nature the planner say i have a fence. Planner will look and say yea, you do, that screening may not be right. Give her clarity on what she has to do and put her on the path to get the permit so we are done with that am i over simplifying this. Why no it is slim to begin with. Im wondering why we are here. It is appealed by the applicant. And we are required be here. We are doing our best to explain the requirements to the Property Owner. We want her to be in compliant dont want her to not comply with the code we energid because of unanimous complaint upon questioning what this curb cut here. Is well parking. If so is it legal . We helped her saying we the put this in writing have a legal parking space you dont have to remove it if you want to keep this but provide screening. Thats all we are saying. Yoot odds are the fence will stay okay on the fence and there is potential she the have to put in new screening and issue a permit and march forward. Keeps her parking and a nice fence. Commissioner eppler. Yes. And the interest of jump start this willing can you give examples when may qualify adequate screening. I mentioned earlier we have seen screening with solid or decorative fences, wood flaps. Wood fence semi open she can leave some top part open. There are many ways to design a fence. We have architects who will help out. I think the architect roached out to her. I talked to the architect he recalls talking to her. We are willing to sit down and say here other options can you have this meets the planning code. Compat annual with the neighborhood and consistent with the guidelines. Okay. Thank you. No further questions does the department of dbi want to weigh in. Thank you. We will new on to Public Comment is there anyone for Public Comment . I dont see anyone in the room or on zoom. So we will move on to reputtal and hear from the appellate first. Mrs. Bacigalupi you have 3 minutes. Well, in tw 000, the it was not required. There was no permit required at this time. And i checked even about 10 years ago if you googled it, said any fence 72 inches or less in San Francisco did in the require a permit. For 23 years it has in the been a problem now it is i guess and im confused why nobody could tell mow that clearer on the letter of determination. I applied in may and i did in the get it until august and this just feels like im run nothing circles i think thats all. I had to say. Thank you. President swig. Based on my line of quick question to planning are you clear that there say path way forward you may get your appeal denied but that is a path way forward that planning will provide you with a path way forward with a name and also compliance issues change and sometimes there are members of the public who choose to not be happy with neighbors and unanimously put in a complaint. Thats what triggers manage and unfortunately in your case, you are forced independent to that complaint and with something not in compliance today as it was before. Are you have clear to a path way forward on this, which i see now as there . Well my concern is if like my appeal is denied does this money i can no longer appeal their choices . What was i guess i would ask. In the i ask the department of plan to have i dialogue with you tonight to give you a plan to talk to and they will give you a direction related when is come mroint and not compliant. And you will be expected to respond to that. And i would say once you get that advisory would i be able to appeal it later . You can appeal anything you want based on my experience you will get clear direction finally. Thank you. In this case. On what your fence should be. On a compliant level. They will give you option what is will make it that car make that fence oshg pang so a car is not seen and that will be the store and he probably with that direction and those choices filing an appeal will not get you far. That was a question in my e mail. There you go. We have a commitment tonight from planning they will help you. Thank you. I trust planning will. Thank you i appreciate that. Them. All of you. Thank you. No further questions. Hear from planning. Thank you. I like to go ahead and clarify a bit what happened early are 2000 in 2001 before the demo, the owner of the property submitted a permit to demo the garage it was in bad condition and build a new garage structure in its place. After multiple efforts on the part of the Planning Department to move permit forward the final comment sent out was no response from the owner was if you demo the existing 96 square foot garage and replace with 80 square foot garage that will reduce the level of compliance for park. Recommend you retain the grand jury and repair it or replace it with other code complying parking revise your Building Permit accordingly. To say i never heard of a Building Permit. It is difficult because we are documentation this says we have been trying to work with her for a long time in trying to get manage this is code compliant on property regarding her parking. We believe what we said is correct. Need a building per nit is in all our publications and internet and planner they will confirm. Any fence 3 feet our higher. In the front of your property. And if you use that fence to screen your ping fence has to be reviewed have adequate screening per 142 and designed this is compatible with the neighborhood. It is a simple case. But i see how it is taking up alegality of time. Thats not our intention and happy to work with the owner to go ahead and make sure she provides a fence that meets the code and consistent with guidelines. Thank you. Thank you. Why you would agree this we both got you in the same room you had help in conversation with this. We have a solution which is provide her with a planner name and forget the past and forget if anything are pointing well is a fence to be affirmed or changed and get done then you dont have to talk again. Sheville a compliant fence and the appropriate will she have the fence and have an opaque capacitity and we dont Vice President to talk to each other again is give her a proper permit. Im here the planner is sheer the za is here we are more than happy to provide that rock and roll. We should deny the appeal and with that automatically you will have a conversation that you will determine properly what permits should be issued and move forward. Yes j. Thanks. Thank you. So commissioners this matter is mitted the standard of review is errorer, bus of discretion. Quick motion we deny the appeal the letter of determination seems to be appropriate. And issued properly. Okay. Za did not error or abuse discretion. Exactly. I believe. You have a comment . I do. I disagree that this was letter this should be upheld. From first of all, i think i made clear i dont think the member of the public mrs. Bacigalupi should go through this press to begin with. She wanted guidance that now the department is saying they can provide. I think highway low of the department represent hos in before us Butt Department itself just dropped the ball in terms of public service. The letter itself on the letter itself. With the letter says 1 fro does in the require the screening in this circumstance. That should be the end the reason why this letter should not be upheld because the letter itself contradicts itself saying 142 sort of does but also says that within fro applies to screening within a build nothing the rear yards and other areas thats what the determination buffers. It is either contradicted by mrs. Tammy or wrong. Because now applying 142 to the circumstance neither in the building nor rear yard nor in other interior area. And it just there is another concern about the whole process. But for those reasons i would in the uphold the letter. I will give you feed become on that. Thats why i asked what will happen if we uphold the appeal. Im not disagreeing with you what are we doing here . And member had a problem talking to member and on a project on manage that should have been footwork and in the spending 45 minutes on this. What will happen is you heard it thats why i asked is most likely as the fence is now in public vow and noticed by the department. There will be an nov and then she will go through the whole same thing we are enabling now which is she will talk to the Planning Department of the talk to the same planner get the same feedback and do what is according to the Planning Department. I dont disagree with you the path of least resistance is to denight appeal and let permit process take place without going through another step, which is serving nov and more bureaucratic activity. I dont disagree on many of your points butt path of least resistance we deny the appeal and we made introductions tonight they see each other they have a press to move forward lets get rocking thats all. I upon dont disagree. I appreciate your attention and ability to bring the parties together tonight and i fully endorse the path you have described that mrs. Tam seems to agree with and bacigalupi would as well. However in terms of the what is before us the letter, i think our endorsement of the letter would make it more difficult for members of the public in the future to get the services they need by endorsing the letter. Thats why i with hold my support for the letter and vote, no on the motion. That you have suggested. Okay. Commissioner eppler. I understand that concern. The one thing that change its a bit is that you know the letter does not itself say that with respect to this circumstance this section 142 does not require the screening, that circumstance where those words are quotation from the zoning interpretation from 2000 where the za determined that looking at the Design Guidelines and the code in total that adequate screening is necessary in a front area and so. You know unfortunately the page break where the page break is that colon sets out empty and you know it is in the from a type graphic cal standpoint an easy way to understand what is going on. It is not this letter at fault it would be the december 2000 zoning interpretation and long as that standses that will be the guidance and the interpretation that is given by planning and this circumstance. Even if we were to get rid of this letter we will not have fix third degree problem you identified. Anybody else . Commissioner trasvina i want to add per of this letter is good for her it establishes there is a legal parking space which is i reason she sought it you could amend the lod you wanted if you over turn today it would tick away her determination that it is is legal parking spot. Im not saying i disagree with you on 142 you might want to over turn the whole thing part of the letter is what she wants. You are always create and i appreciate that i think uphold the letter and i would hope that as president swig say this is is the left timey will see anything having to do with this fence before us. I hope i think we all hope that the Planning Department can address the questions with to this member of the public to her satisfaction. So i will not i will vote against the motion. And move into that. Okay. So we have a motion from president swig to deny the appeal and uphold the letter on the base the za did in the error or abuse his discretion. On that motion commissioner trasvina . [inaudible]. Commissioner lemberg. Why aye commissioner eppler aye. This carries 30 and the appeal is denied 31 and appeal is denied. That conclude this is merth if you can connect with mrs. Tam she will help you. Thank you. We are moving on to item 4 jurisdiction request 232. Subject property 2442 great highway. Letter from great highway llc asking the board take jurisdiction over permit which was issueod may second of 2022. The appeal period ended may 22 of 22 and filed on september 15 of 2023 the permit hold cert storea highway llc, interior remodel of 2 residential units number one and 3 front facade alterations. Commissioner trasvina your name is up. Okay. Thank you. So we will hear from the requestor first. Mr. Brawl. Welcome, you have 3 minutes. Thank you. Im tony brufrom great highway llc. Im here to be able to open the appeal period as we know our tenants received any notice about the subject from 2442 great highway. Which looks into multiple window in our building. You can seat photos, if can you show the photos. You seat photos. Our building is recessed. They had no idea the building is from each side. Until they need our help to be able to finish the outside. The rate you look in our multiple tenant windows this is great highway looking facing the ocean. So people care about privacy. And this window push dick lar and it is belling 2448 of great highway has material low affected our tenants on privacies. We will like to able to open the appeal and have our occurrence to be considered as well as our voices and tenant voices heard in regard to the windows having the negative affect to the building and to our tenants. Privacy is fundamental for comfortable living. The layout and the units afford tenants a certain level of privacy which important. We never an attempt privacy rooms on windows facing the 30 seconds. Also like to bring up the work for the solution for windows and removal of [inaudible]. Asbestos. One photo we mentioned to the owner of 24 fro that look like asbestos and next thing we know. You know there was asbestos you see the yellow looking sides built in the 1960s. Thank you. Thank you. Commissioner lemberg as i question. Why i have a couple questions for you number one when did it is side windows installed . Can you unmute yourself . Please . There you go. Why yes. There were installed in the long than i told us that they wanted our thom put the scalpel and they [inaudible] the condition transactor told us they will install windows. Windows what windows and then they told us we have plans and put it in. And said we never knew about this. You know. They said well we going to put it and said you cant have access to our property. Next thing there is a lift you see in the photos. The completion of the window from the outside and exterior and i said than i had done the w without anybody noticing and i understand well is in noticing required for this and done over the counter. I dont know at the time when planning approve third degree realized consequence opening 2 windows. People are there like. Remodel to enjoy ocean and privacy all the sudden putting windows. I appreciate the your concerns mr. Ball but ultimately you have not answered when the windows first appeared. 3 weeks ago. Okay. My next question is. Unfortunately did not have a full brief but had a statement of appeal. In this statement of appeal it says you approved the neighbor the subject building po actuality scaffolding on your building implies you knew about the fact work was being done. Is that not correct. It is not correct they ask side for water proving and only water prove to be done to the building they needed access we gave them access being a Good Neighbor said done in a week they dragged feet. Probably for 3for you weeks before they took the scaffold out. No mention of windows then. None when hay roached become to us again for the scaffolding, and you know the contractor mentioned way will put windows, wait a minute. Nobody every talked about windows. Then the picture was taken 2 weeks ago. That they had a lift. From the sidewalk. Du ask your neighbor to see the plans . We asked them for the plans and they just send us a mull portion of the window. They never shared us with us the whole set of plans. We reached out to the Planning Department to see and they referred us to other agencies and we were told this you mode the architect permission for plans they cant just share the plans with us. So. We never got a copy of the plans. They never told us the scope of the work as to when they are plan to do. I understand there is no notice required. But you know i appreciate looking into this merit and looking into 10 act there is for years this is their home and feel their privacy is ruined with in notice. Thank you. We will hear from the permit holder representatives. Excuse me. Good evening members of the board im tom juney behalf of the project importance and Property Owner micheal horvsz. Sorry trouble with my voice tonight. Subject permit is for interior remtsdz of tw of the 4 units of the property and alterations of front and side facades. Im thieve talk about the windows and the privacy issues raised by the neighbor. But request for jurisdiction is an exceptional remedy. Especially in a case like this a year and a half almost after the permit was issued the board is clear in rowels clear about when a jurisdiction request granted. It is in extraordinary case. Where the board finds the city en10ingally or inadvertent low caused requestor to be late in filing the appeal. That is rules of board article 5 section 10 a. The requestor acknowledged there was no notice. Required. No make in. The citys procedures. In way caused the requestor to be late in filing the appeal that is the end of the inquiry under the boards rules out of in the interested disclosure, we showed you in papers the windows in question. The window and the project were reviewed proper low and approved by planning. Showed the sign off and the permit tracking system bit planners. And showed the electric of impact on the building by photos that is not per of the consideration we understand, you would be curious. We feel like the neighbor is makeing out to be more than it is. It is not at an angle it impacts privacy of the neighbors. Neighbor has filed a complaint already. That complaint was inspected and dismissed. We thank you is the proper route for situation like this. We are happy to talk about the project and any concerns you may have j. I dont see questions. Commissioner trs vina. I have a quick question. I will was in the aware well was a complaint from the neighbor. Can you tell us whether the neighbor are you referring to the owner of the property or a tenant. The owner. Thank you. Okay. Thank you. Now the Planning Department. Tain tammy for planning. 2442 great highway a 3 story, for you unit building in rm1 zoning. Property ending with the 4 digits 6097 was foil in the january 2022. You heard the permit to remodel interior of 2 units number one and throw and alter the front facade. There is no change to the unit count or increase in the size or envelope of the existing building no neighborhood notification required. The planning noted in the permit tracking there was no bbnn, block notation nor complaint at that time on the property. The permit was approved overnight counter by plan and after dbi sighed permit issued on may second of 2022. The jurisdiction ask is from tony brawl the owner of 2444, 48 great highway adjacent complex directly to the south. Tonys is concerned about the 2 new windows. Believes the tw windows impact the tenants privacy. And also concern body future work and believed there is work without permit. Tone denot provide evidence though unclear hat illegal work may be. Judging from the google street view w on the permit has commenced it was proper low reviewd and issue more than 17 months ago. Given the location of the taupeys complex set become from the front Property Line the 2 new windows setback 10 feet away and not face directly on the windows on tonys building. The city did not intentionally cause the requested late in filing the department asked the board deny the jurisdiction request. That concludes my report, happy to answer questions commissioner lemberg thank you, i have a question. This is on the planning report from the planning report it states that the front facade was to be altered but what is absent to me the side of the building is to be ered as well and i knowledge the window in question are on the side of the building would not be considered part of the front facade is that correct. Why no the front includes the five part visible from the street do you to the fact the Neighboring Properties to the south the jurisdiction is set become. And the permit goes along with the plan. In order to receive hat changes are to the front facade whether the front ownership be one elevation or the turn that you see from the street. That is documented on the plans. So the definition of when institutes front is based on the setback of the neighboring building. No when you see from the street. I will put up some photographs of property. If this helps this is the over head, please. This is the how the building locked like before construction the subject property. This is the jurisdiction requestors property that is set become from the front. This is the front facade. Includes the 41ed elevation and the part that is on the side that you can see. From of the street i understands that is what it would electric like. If im between the 2 you see all the way to the back on either side. Would this be considered front facade under this definition. Im sorry repeat that. Between the it buildings. In front looking down i think a bit of analy. No. Nope yoochl okay. I assumed there was. There is no space correct this make sense thank you. We will hear from the department of building inspection. Good evening. Commissioner im Matthew Green the dbi tonight. The permit to remodel 2 unit in a 4 unit building issued on may of 2022 after approval of all agencies there was not dbi notification. Only with demo or vertical or horizontal addition there has been a dozen building inspection done. For foundation and rent on september 20 for sheer wall nailing. There was a complaint fileod august 16. Our inspector met with superintendent. Viv being all windows were approved. The Property Line windows are allowed understanding no right to keep them should the Property Owner chot to build to property roin. A couple months ago we had a presentation they followed all procedures here. The permit issues properly and the project is prosecute seeding steady low. Dbi recommends the request be denied. I would like to dress a comment the appellate made. He mentioned that he need architect approval to get the plans. You can view the plans at db oishgs if you want copies you need the architects approval. Im available for questions you may have commissioner eppler. Jowl said that the window complaint fileod august 24 in the complaint fileod august 16th. Site inspection was august 24. Thank you. And did this complaint include the lot line windows. Why yes. Like me to put complaint up. Why great. Thank you. Complaint on the Southern Side plan to install windows take away privacy from the complex next door well like the windows cancelled. As that is the way it has been since the building was built and getting push back and concerns in regards to installation of windows on the side. This complaint was received on the website the dbi website. Assigned to an inspector and he david the inspector did do a site visit on august 24. And Everybody Knows that says the date this condition was last observed was on the day prior to the filing of the complaint that was the 15th. Excuse me. I will note that it says the date this condition was left benched by the complainant on the 15th. The day before. Sure. Yes. That part you file on the internet and review and gets transferred the date has a day of willing time. Why thank you. Why no further questions. We are moving on to Public Comment. Is there anyone who would like it provide Public Comment. Come up here, please. Sir, in the plaid. And after you fill out a peeshg card to have your name. Thank you. Go ahead you have 3 minutes im anthony settles a resident of apartment 2448 great highway have been in the building for 15 years my complaint is more than windows first never receiving notice of the project taking place they say only w on the facade that is in the trough they are doing on the officer as well. I seen dangerous practices on this job site. When they were installing the windows hit a public mailbox with the equipment and broke the mailbox off the ground. Did not report this i have a picture of the broken mailbox. Over head. As you see there. Thats the mailbox snapped off the ground. This is this. Is w taking place on the officer i will get on this in a second. There are the brush marks on the side of the mailbox where their lift struck it. When they were using that lift they had no fall protection. Nobody on the sidewalk protecting pedestrians. Tenants and public walking under their lift as in use the windows installed. And they continually thrown debris off the third story roof without anything on the ground. Strit to the sidewalk and without letting the residents or public know had is going on. My second issue is the w taking place on the roof. It has been told to me by the contractor they are installing i officer top patio and solar array. This will invade my privacy it will give tenant in that building look into my bedroom window and living room. I can show you pictures of this work ticking place now. Thank you. Thank you. Pubeing fill out a speaker card well get your name correct for the minutes wrchl you have 3 minutes im Gary Anderson a resident at 248 great highway in apartment 12 on the fourth floor. I have been watching the progress of the construction going on and anthony said the unsafe work practices being in construction im appalled by what is happening there. My concern is this permit. I took the first time i saw the permit it mentions that there will be some roof deck and patio work on top of the third story would affect my privacy. I have been watching contractor come in my winnows are directly. You will day long they are standing out working. I can show you over head. Please. This is where the roof construction is done. This is outside my window. Now they are talking about putting up a patio. Kwlaen it is im curious. What they are trying to do with the officer. I see where they are set up for the solar panels you see that on the backside the front side is where my apartment is i dont know if they are put nothing a screened deck or going up . I have questions on the permit. And do have a picture on here of the day i first sought permit become in may. It said this there was i chance to appeal back in march but i never noticed noticed this permit posted. I walk pass that building every day i valid seen it nobody even sought permit. So also with the side windows. That is an invasion of privacy. It is window to window is what it is. In the to mention the loyal pollution off of this building now. I dont know if the Beach Community is quiet. Dark and on the ocean. You in we got Light Pollution from another building lighting up our building at night. Also my question i have questions on when is happening on the roof. I know there is solar panels. I see it is set up the front is a question to me. Whatever is happening i would like to i den want it to help tell ini haved my privacy. This merit is commit mitted. Is there other comment on zoom . This merit is submitted. Commissioner trasvina . Thank you, president swig. Im nil heard Public Comment i thought i was clear on what was going on here. I understand from the city agency they say it is intearior work and the front facade. Im concerned about the talking about the public complains work on the roof. Which does not appear to be in the description of the city was telling us. Is there opportunity to ask . Our representatives i want this clarified. There is a permit for solar a jurisdiction request on this permit as well in the 2 weeks. Well is a permit for the solar installation and filed for roof deck that has not been approved yet that solar work should be going ford but the w for deck should in the be going forward. I will have an inspector investigate. It is not subject to this permit. Today. Why is the correct message to the public and to the owner of the other would abouting this theyville an opportunity to make their occurrence known in about that separate permit . I continuing is on the calendar for solar. Jurisdiction request. Solar permit. The other yes. Will be another appealable permit has not been approved or issued yet. Thank you. As then that is prit from this prosecute seeding for this proceeding i am not convinced the city has done the things that would allow us to take jurisdiction. Anything in sorry. I concur with commissioner trasvina. I dont i think well is recourse for the neighbors for sure i dont think it is this remedy here. And i think this certainly the neighbors are on notice that work is being done and to you think look out for had is going on with this project next door and i think dbi is as well. But i dont i agree with commissioner trasvina not appointment to take jurisdiction over this appeal. I concur with the pregnancy of my fellow commissioners. Would you like to make a motion. Move we deny because the city took no actions to prejudice the requestor. You want to say do not cause requestor to be late in filing the appeal. Why yes. [laughter]. I like to make a comment. Thank you public for showing up. And making your thoughts knownful unfortunately the permit period lapsed and there was nothing this got in anybodys way to to file a complaint an appeal at that time. What i suggest which is suggested to you, is this if you are worried about an officer deck you are noticed that than i are talking about it. So Pay Attention if you would like to know how to pay takening close low gain access to a website or information related that potential permit. Im we have folks in the room tina there at that desk and can inform you about the timing that may occur on that permit. And when to how to file an appeal if you wish. Okay thank you. Thank you. We have a motion from commissioner eppler to deny on the bases the city did not intentionally cause to be late in foiling the appeal on this motion commissioner trasvina. Aye dmrn lemberg. Why aye president swig aye. That carries and the request is denied. We are moving on item 5. This is appeal 23040 the jug shop versus deputy of health, 1648 pacificasm appealing on august 1823 to the jug shop tobacco permit low nile to Tobacco Sales permit e hd 11992. And we will hear from the appellate first. Welcome you have 7 minutes. Hi. Hello president swig. And board member im michael owner of the jug shop. Purhave aors of fine wine and other specials the jug shop appealing the denial by Public Health for retail Tobacco Sales at 1648 pacifica avenue that was avenue august 18 of 23. The jug shop is independent family owned business establish in the 1965 and a proud San Francisco legacy business. We have sold Tobacco Products throughout our long history. And in june of 2021, our business was displace friday i 15 year location at 1590 pacifica avenue. And it was do you it a large mixed use development. Amidst the pandemic. Secured a temporary home a half block away at 1648 pacific avenue. And we moved in june 9 of 2021, lets see endurd 2 years of temp refer relocation. It is proven to be you know detrimental to the business. And the loss of our cigarette sales further compounds that issue for us. And so we are in hopes that the board will rowel to over turn the denial of our retail Tobacco Sales permit based on long history and also the status of our ref location circumstances. Thank you we have a few questions from president swig and commissioner trasvina. Thank you for appearing in front of us tonight. I have been to your previous location and i recognize you as a bonified good business. In the process of your relocation, and the transferrance of license, et cetera. You have to go through. Did anybody from the d. Health ever inform you detailed transferring to becomeo a license and tell you im sorry. Anybody say will be results as mead [inaudible]. With the move and and did you get disclosure that at that point that the tobacco license would not be reaffirmed because of the licenses in the neighborhood and the close proks imity of other license holders. Why yes the Public Health department in august of 21, confirmed that upon their site visit what application would be automated to public Healing Department and the Cigarette Division and so we did not hear anything for a very long while im sure that was a result of covid pandemic. And then you know february of 22, i think roached out and said, you know you dont have a license your account has been closed. Which was a prize because we had never closed our ash count we knew we were trying to transfer it. And so yes. That essential low you know here we are. There are severing conversations with one of the represents there in the Health Department and he said there was a huge back willing this is item we have in the got to your application. And now here we are. And we do plan to return to our original 1590 address, we are you know hopefully achieving that but in the meantime we are residing at 16 praet and hopeful low will continue our reupon instate our sale of cigarette and continue that practice. Why thank you for this testimony. I will ask the department of health steps up and part of their testimony the rowels that prebl should have been explained to you in the first place and important question i question for both of us. When a business temp rirl moves from one address to another moves become to the original address where they held the license is there retroactive benefit and should your expectations about when moving back. Can we ask. Yes. Department of health represent be appropriateed answer that. Thank you. Commissioner trasvina has a question thank you president swig and thank you for your testimony. I correct me, where i may be have the wrong impression i thought i read in the materials this you plan to move back to 1590 october of this year. Yea. In terms of original kruck completion at this development there was i come mreegz date set april 1 and then it hen a sliding schedule of completions. We do once i think now they completed construction we will now be able to start our work in the space and move the ball forward on this. Is tht private owners redevelopment or city work . Sullivan development. 1590 is private property not city property. Correct. And so it was in the you did in the initiate the idea it move out. I did not. Why no. Right. I thought i read in the record that you terminated the license at 1590 in order to get a license at 1648. Why that was an unknown factor they indicated that down the line your account was closed. Not something we would have done. I dont know president swig said may be moving from one election to the next triggered i closure that is manage we were unaware of we figure today happened at Public Health department but uncertain. One final question. If we rule in your favor is the affect you will start selling cigarettes at 1648. Yes. If we rowel against you it means you will not be able to null move back to 1590. Yea it will mean we can reinstate sales of significant rates at 1648 and hopeful low that helps our move status become to 1590. That is when we are hopeful of. Im getting a sense how many months of loss of income are we talking about. You are trying to get tonight is the ability to sell at 1648. If the schedule guess longer should be about 6 months thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Commissioner lemberg. Of thank you. I thought i noticed in the referred that this was the work done on 1590 was soft story related . If t is 6 story mixed use ground residential and condos above. What is the work that is performed on this building. . It was a demo complete demo and a brandnew building. Okay. Resurrected. Okay. I must have made that up. I wanted to clarify. No further questions. Now the d. Public health. Thank you. Good evening president swig and commissioners. Im larry kessler. Im the Program Supervisor for San Francisco Retail Tobacco permit program. I have been with dph for 27 years as an inspector and in in assignment in the Tobacco Program for a year. The program is very ably run by jenny young behind me in the program for over 10 years runing program. She is available as well to answer questions you may have. Excuse me. As the brief states the jug shop moved to from 1590 pacific to location 1648 pacific, did apply for Retail Tobacco permit and have been selling it at 1648 since 2021. To my knowledge they may be selling he may have discontinued based on feedback from us im not clear about that. But after reviewing he submitted the application. We reviewed it and we determined that we would not be able to issue him a Retail Tobacco permit at that location due to permitting restrictions in the health code. Those have been specified in the brief submitted to you. I would be happy top go each point but the main reason for that the 1648 pacific address never had a retail to becomeo permit and the health code prevents us from issuing a permit at a location never had a tobacco permit. There are other issues as limp that are addressed in the brief to you. Well is more than 45 tobacco permits in that district. As well as already 2 permitise within 500 feet they are both restrictions in the health code. There are exceptions allowed for to get around permitting restrictions. And we tried apply as much to this if sillity knowing the difficult and he situation of what happened here. But there was no exceptions available to this applicant in order to issue this permit. Due to that result of. No exceptions available and the restriction on a new permit issued on a new facility in San Francisco this never sold tobacco we request the board deny this appeal. Im happy to go over specifics. So i think im the one on the board who gone through a hearing like this. I understand the issues. Can you affirm for me it took me a while to get my arms around this the first time and im going to ask mrs. Young. We had fun together before. Sarcastic. Had i irrelevant like to you do for fwhord at this time to because you were indirect i would like to you give a fuller explanation about the whole map of San Francisco the various districts the number of licenses this are available in any district when is the criteria related to adding i single license in any district. What happens when somebody moves all that stuff buzz i think it is important for this body and newer commissioners. Now new anymore but newtory this type situation. Give them a little broader tutorial on this so they understand. And then i will ask mrs. Young to take a trip with mow down memory complain we will talk about a legacy item we heard probably 45 years ago. You will remember i promise. In f you would. Yes. I think jeanine, mrs. Young in the program for many years doling with density issues. Im Jeanine Young with the Health Departmentful i have been with the Health Department since this month will be 30 year anniversary. Congratulations with the to becomeo Program Since 2010. In 2015 San Francisco decided through a lot of community, Public Meetings at the board of supervisors to there should be more look at how how many to becomeo permit in the districts we had a thussand permits and we had districts with few permit and a lot with concentrated retail permits. It was decided that San Francisco should have a more uniform permit and that was when they established i density cap of 45 permits. Had the ordinance did was make sure that current per hit holds would not lose permits the new ordinance kick in when there is a new change of ownership. When there is i change of ownership. There is a lot of restrictions. I would say ground floor the Health Department it deny a permit. We have 11 supervisorial districts in 2015 we had one below the cap of 45 district 7. Now we have about 596 permits now. With 4 districts are below the cap. The remaining districts are high low concentrated. In this district 3 there are 97. So. When well is i change of ownership and get this application we look at criteria before we issue a to becomeo permit that includes there cannot be another permit within 500 feet. Not within 500 feet of a school circumstance12 private or public. Cannot be a tobacco shop. Not be a Food Establishment with on site consumption of beverages or alcoholic and food and cannot be in a location where the Health Deputy in the issued a permit in the past. Those other density criteria and cannot be in a district with more than 45 permits there are exceptions. Those exceptions are extremely limited. Limited to only retail markets. To becomeo shops and those limitations are a direct negotiation so if i meet criteria i am able to sell my store and that new buyer will be able to get a tobacco permit. And other exceptions. If there is a to becomeo shop or market and the owner wants to sell the store to their child the child can get a to becomeo permit. The exception which i think you bruup which is the store forced relocate. Because of seismic retrofitting. Due to the soft story requirements under dbi that store can relocate but we have learned this than i must relect at a location where we previously issued a permit. And then when they are able to issue a permit is that relocated address until than i move back. And then there is one more in the event of death or divorce. Those other exceptions. We take a lot of time to like talk to our tobacco owners and the applicants. To make sure they understand all of the requirements in order for the Health Department to issue a to become backo permit before someone transfer or moves or guess this esescrow than i will contact us so we can help them guide them and direct them on options may be. Unfortunately, as in this case, by the time we were notified than i had already moved. And that is where we are here now we cannot issue the permit we did look at every requirement in every exception to see if they would qualify for anything. Thank you very much for this. I will upon end go down memory lane and ask you a question related this specific case the reason i am going down memory lane to show examples whf you talked about. Okay. There were 2 gas stations in the sunset about 23 years ago and a change of ownership. And the owners of the gas stations came in front of us. And they said wit we have gas stations the permits come with the stations your answer was . No. Permits dont transfer this is in the orns. So when well is i change of ownership that owner has to apply for a brandnew permit. Why there was another example and i i cant remember what happened. But i know it was we heard it 3 times. And it was on third street and the move was of the location acorn are Grocery Store and moved about 250 feet. To another location. And there was the same result that you moved. You left your ability to sell tobacco and was there an exception there or what happened with this . That was an example of a 2 story they were in i 2 story 2 soft story building. Than i had applied for the exception they thought would work. Dbi was really tried hard look nothing referred bunkham dbi came before special testified this location could very well qualify under the soft story retrofit requirements. In the future. So this board over turnedoir denial and permit issueed that location. But since then we learn friday our City Attorney that when the soft storieen when the building exception is applied than i must move in a location where we issued the permit in the past. And this is because the laws requires that there is no new locations where the Health Department issue permits. Here we are with this one. Thank you for your answer i think this is helpful. For the folk who is have not been through 1 of these. So here we have a situation where the owner is rebuilding the building. The older permit is has to move they cannot operate when being demo and rebuild. And so there is clarity around everything that you are talking about. You move, suddenly there are too many permit in d3. No room for you also there is the 500 foot rowel that is 2 strikes against you and so clarity around that. Now. The building is build and the original space is back. That former permit holder has every intention and under oath i know he is the truth they are moving back. Is there an exception there so when he moves back to that location that is previously been okayed for a permit and the same owner has not been a transfer of ownership just the owner of the building he is not. Get out for awho i until you can move become in. Where are you there . Because it would seem, i dont im not reaching conclusions. Cord to when the rules are, so would seem at that former permit holder moves become to the same location that permit could be be veil for an exception or some adjustment . Im clear not good on the next location. But i just moving forward on this. Yes. Tell us the rules around that. Sure. So i think in this case it irrelevant is about all the actions that taken place to get where we are today. Tonight. The fact this the business we are listening. I read the e mails and read the ordinance they submitted. There was irrelevant belief on their per an ordinance was passed allow them to transfer all of their permits. There is also a belief this when we check the Tax Collector and found closure they are testifieding than i were not the withins to close the their previous permits sometimes people domain tain their permits even though they are not selling to becomeo for this reason. There is a support for us to irrelevant look closer and see if we can correct some mistakes med. But my manager supervisors here for. And we will definitely work with the business. Especially if there were misstakes on our part. Prein tour low closing the permit. This permit on our part was closed woe saw was closed in the Tax Collector they saw there was no building thats why we close it on our end but we are willing to go back and relook at that and w with them about appropriating them for going become to 1590. Pacific avenue. What should our expectations potential low be in i know you have to chat with where you are manager. This is an exception. But you know like the peoples court. And understood we are all for Small Business and legacy businesses this are Community Mall business we like that that makes San Francisco, San Francisco. So what are and terrible expectations here in should there be expectification he hold a tobacco license at his temp refer location or not. So. At 1648 pacific we cannot issue a to becomeo permit there. This is when the ludoes not allow the Health Department to do one there. Felony 90 pacific we can look back and correct makes so that a permit can be reestablished. There. I think my manager can peek to that specifically. I adopt to let this board know this we are working hard to try to figure out how we can get this Important Information to our tobacco permit holders we have 596 we want them to make decisions and understands how a move or a change of ownership or addition of a partner or deletion of a partner will affect that to becomeo permit. Lose. New location. Same owner moves from the location for the reasons this are valid. In the any building. When steps do we take tonight understanding this no permit in the new place potential low you guys will have a discussion about a permit what kinds of jurisdiction or decision should are you recommending we move forward with and im not confirming my fellows are going to go along with your decision or my line of questioning i love to know given those circumstance when is is your best advice thank you i will legality larry answer this and thank you. Thank you very much for going down memory lane with me. So. Good question. Regarding the move back to 1590. Pacific. There is complication in the paperwork. We did the Health Department did notify the Tax Collector office to put it out of business based on the drive by the build suggest gone. And i was concerned about the applicant or operator was aware of that. I did contact the Tax Collectors office. The e mail i got back from them stated, billsod data base that the owner is the twhn put it out of business. So i dont im not sure how their did thea base works and an indication if there is a furthermore or was simple low tieed some other aspect of i permit the city issues. Could have been a disfault thing. We have facilities that during covid places that were prit nothing hotel and could not prit. They pid for the permit even though they were in the operating. We had a number of those. So if it was the case of Something Like that where the owner would maintain the building was going through work min tains validity of the permit then the permit would always been there. And would reoccupy that building at that address. The complication is understanding if the based on the Tax Collector information if than i would allow i reinstatement this is something i kennel answer myself. I dont think it is unworkable i dont know what happened. In this situation. I think we have given the commissioner trasvina are we within i will look at the side to the City Attorney. Are we are dealing with an appeal now on the permit allowed will at the new location. That is very clear that is i know the rules. You all recited them to us. They are tight. However, within our jurisdiction or do we sit become and trust you this you tie a relocation issue to the potential reinstate am of a license this was in Good Standing before a move to a demo and is moving back to the exact same address there was i legacy business in Good Standing . And will hopeful low continue to be in the future. I think the comp kalgdz be if we had the issue a now permit and is this when you are referring to. Finding out if there is good reason and possibility because seems like an exception good exception. And you know to i Small Business that operating in Good Standing for a time and had a relocation due to their land lords action not to their own enhanced the assistant district attorneys position on that block located. And this would complete the enhancement of that new building. So. It is positive, positive one technicality. And can we get do we have leverage i look at you. Or may be we say, you say rick all we are doing tonight is saying yes or no to the permit at hand. Has no ability it rowel on the original address on the matter before us. Thank you. I think we heard from the City Attorney. Your jurisdiction is give you advice, too. But i think we put this item on your map. Am i getting a sense you have sensitivity for the situation. You know thats all i can say. Why thank you. I appreciate it. Commissioner trasvina. Thank you. President swig and exhausted all of my questions. I try. And i appreciate the guidance and the back grundz and context. I appreciate youed 27 years and celebrate 30 years as a City Employee you exude the dedication our city workers of trying to resolve problems for members of the public. And you are an inspector, strirtds but in the policy make exteriors not the whons written the rules you have iion to do. And seems to me that the health code is trying to drive people like [inaudible] out of business. Route the number of people selling cigarettes. I appreciate you have to follow what the healing codes are and the rules are perhaps this is know opportunity for those supervisors supervisors and aids to hear and see here is an opportunity for legislation to address a compelling situation. My question is mrs. Young you couple times you stated the code is triggers by change of ownership. Is it also triggered how is it in this situation the move . Yes. Yes. So the new at the new location the new business. So the Business Owner had to apply for the food permit. And they applied for the to become to becomeo at the new location who is best to advise or explain to permit ordinance moving, is it your office. The office of Small Business . It is the Health Department but we are always looking to train and work with office of smail Small Business they call me directly and we have conversations we are all trying to support our Small Businesses and the collaborate rigz is the best way. Sometimes when we have to say no, office of Small Business has resources for our businesses they can take advantage at no cost. We actually do i think sometimes i feel a backbone where they call me directly to talk about specifics. Thank you for your service. You are welcome. Thank you. Thank you. We will now move on to Public Comment. Is there anyone to provide comment on this merit . If you are on wareroom raise your hand wrchl rebutel. You have 3 minutes to address the board. From their explanation understanding it was trigger in the this denial in this instance because we were in moving into a location that never had a tobacco license, you know thats clear. But it is 50 yards a way on pacific and poke we are mid block throw a rock where i was and i cant maintain our license. So that is the mind boggling aspect of it and i understands the protocols that than i are up against the factor is having this permit tick place in the return location. But of course would be great low helpful to us instate it if possible at our current 1648. Thank you for your time. Thank you, president swig . I went in depth for your educations well as the others. And mine refresher course. I like to stay up and im sorry that you are moved came in a time where may be covid a lot of people not at work and hole in the swiss cheese that general low has a lot of holes im sorry you may have suffered a lack of communication or fall by the way side and hope you cut slack to the city in the tough time. It would have gone in this direction anyway. Yes. Because these are the rowels the laws. Understood. Are you clear tonight we heard from the department this it is in the a hard, no and would you please introduce yourself to mrs. Young because she know whats show is doing and great in the past and transparent and knowledgeable about process here may be you have i dont think we can do anything but speak with mrs. Young and an opportunity when you move back okay. I wish you success. Thank you. Thank you. No further questions. Anything fourth from Public Health . I would like to thank department of Public Health for prosecute voiding us with clarity and giving us the town to get a refresher course on what the law is the good and body new and thank you for your sensitivity to the situation and open mindedness having a further dialogue. With the permit holder he returns to his old location. Where he held a permit in Good Standing. Thank you very much. Commissioner lemberg in thank you, president swig. It is clear the department of Public Health, than i acted present low and did their j. W. S to the letter of the law and did not do anything wrong. Ir believe this it is clear that the result is inequitable that is not department of public healings fault or the representatives fault. I gwen i think you did your jobs competent low im reminded of previous proceedings we have heard. Not for tobacco permits. Where we have taken it upon ourselves in act in ecquit. This case would be a good case to do that i feel the denial of the permit while legal low just is inequitable and sort of punishing this legacy mall Business Owner for manage out of his control the move to building down the street. For that reason i like to explore guaranteeing this pelleen though i dont think the department of Department Health errored because i dont want to see this result and this small legacy business lose their entire business and not able to reopen in a new location when this time come. Advice on inbounds or out of bounds legislative law. And cant reinvent the law fair does tht count. Fair or unfair unfortunately does in the count the number the commissioner lemberg desires to go legal for us to do with the explanation of the statutes which are in place. And also in mind that i say, make an exception and the next one make an exception again. Can you give background comment on that. Its the boards decision. I add sunrise the boards obligation to follow the law as passed by the board of supervisors. And if there is a concern with the law being inequitable. My advice to be that a legislative concern and in the a concern for this board to take in their hand and not follow the code provides. If i may respond. I certainly understand had show is saying and we have sort of taken that pregnant in other case the taxi permit denials come to mind. We granted 3 in a row. For exact low the same reason, felt the result would inequitable. There is precedent of us doing this recently. I move to grant the appeal on bases that the should have twrin down prior. On the bases that the results in the denial is inequitable and justice would not be served if we did not over turn the permit denial. Any other comments on this . Before we vote . Xhrp commissioner trasvina i appreciate the commissioner trying to come up with a different view. Which is like mine, more just. We got nightmares dealing with city bureaucracies and a front per of the building the side of the building. Other issues. And here if there was i way in which we could be assured that well, i think the difficulty with mr. Lembergs approach what i refer there would be lee way by the department of enforcing that provision at 1648. But he is not authorizeed sell if he could sell and get a resolution of 509 this is not when we have bee have him not selling and multiple bases. There is i think thinking we could move when he couldnt and the i believe the is there a school near by this location . Or a multiple . The issue is i read in the presentation there are 2 concern permit holders within 500 feet which is the prevents another reason why there would be a new issuance prevented. It good too far. I would in the be able to support it. Commissioner eppler you want to chime in . I do have shopped there and i do share a lot of commissioner lembergs occurrence the way this law operated. Because i note that we are building a lot of projects similarly built or entitled and witting to be built the treatment of businesses theory displaced by what is when we hear people say a public good. Adds this the Housing Stock this needs to be remedied. I note that we are dealing with a very restricted type of business license. There are others like the alcohol beverage role and license for there we have district this is have restrictions in numbers this could preponder pop up. Result of the breadth of this issue, we are more prudent in seeking a legislative fix for this issue. Than trying to take this one off case and so. I might feel different if this was at the beginning of the tenure at this location they had not aveiled of sales up to it point in than i will move as soon as the construction gods allow them into their old, new location that the department of Public Health will work with in getting releft lanesed the circumstance i foal this we need to follow the law in this and we need to w our magic with legislators to fix it. My foal suggest similar to the previous to commissioners. Im sympathetic i have been a customer there. In the past. Sorry. You know this is i thing the law is the luthe exception under minds the department i have a hard time doing that. I would absolutely not support a motion to as sympathetic as i am support a motion that would go in the face of the law and i will allow a permit at the current location. Now. On the flip side i absolutely encourage the department to review the situation since it was in the in any way, shape or form the choice of the Business Owner to move. He had to and now move back. That is an important point and i would ask that you look at that. I would also suggest the Business Owner if we move against your appeal tonight that i dial the number of your supervisor and encourage his support of your situation which i know your supervisor. He is i good guy. And loves mall business and legacy businesses. And i think this he would assist you in encouraging the City Department to not break the law and give you a license at your concern location but encourage a positive review of your situation with the department of health encourage them to review that legacy permit and return it to you. This is my suggestion i cant support you tonight or the motion. My motion. Do woeful have a replace am motion . Please . Motion to deny the appeal and the motion to deny in that the statutes of the department of healing are correct in their issue i permit at the concern location. Okay. We have a motion from president swig to deny the appeal andup hold the denial of the sales permit on the bases it was properly issued and issued this was not the issue denial. Properly. Correct. Okay. On that motion commissioner trasvina. Aye commissioner lemberg. No commissioner eppler yea. The pel is denied. Oui ever moving on to item 6. It is appeal 23041 fan ford garfinkel versus department of inspection appealing issuance to an alteration permit. Here introntal addition at the penthouse floor. Remove 2 chimneys and replace gutters and spout. 20220329, 1124 and we will hear from the appellate first who is on zoom. Mr. Garfinkel, welcome you have 7 minutes. You are on mute. We cant hear you. Can you hear me you in. Yes, thank you. Im in jordan a long distance. I have previously attempted contact the owners and the architects by phone and e mail they have refused to talk to me that is one reasons why we are here. The other one is this they we went to the Planning Department. We had a hear and they approved the plans. And the architect stated under oath that he would abide by the plans. But the he drew new plans and issued them merchandise 30 in 23. And than i were approved in august 23. That is why the delay in the me. New plans do not include what was previously approved at the Planning Department. Specifically the windows on the North Elevation facing mine. Were fixed and obscure the now plan approved do not show that. Even though the architect stated at the Planning Department that he would abide by those plans that said they would be replace in the kind. So, the other problem with the plans is they state the North Elevation says the existing windows to be replace exclude moved to close location. In september there was a walk through and all the windows were removed. The best my knowledge, there is in windows existing the plans are not accurate. There is a possibility that they installed them with you a permit this. Is unlikely. And the building sitting there for a long time. You have any questions i will be help to answer. But i like you to consider the redrawing of the plans accurate and to so what was approved by the Planning Department previously. That the plans the windows would be replace in the kind. Thank you very much. Thank you. I dont see any questions. We will hear if the permit holder his representative is here. Welcome and thank you for your patience. Good evening im [inaudible] the architect for the project. First i like to read i letter from the family that owns the property. This is from the daughter. Doctor members thank you for your time im sorry i cant join the meeting we embarkod remodeling of my childhood home a part of my family since 1993 a hope my 2 children can grow up and bring joy to the grandparents through multigenerational living. It saddens me our neighbor perceives it as an intrusion on their privacy. This perception lead to thousands of dollars pent in delays. But more painfully the loss we have unable to live together and have a share the tame withure parents i hope that this is the left of the stalling that our neighbor prospect gifted so we can move forward and have our family home back again. Sincere low mira chen. As you heard from the family had hay express third degree hen i lengthy project. It star in the 2016 had plans were drub and approved but due to covid and difficult getting contractor work did not begin until the end of 2021. During construction begin nothing 2022, complaint filed and building inspector discovered the permit expired. They halted all w and due to reasons beyond my understanding both the Planning Department and the Building Department required a now Building Application even for the same work. Completed the application and plans after the planning approved the plans mr. Garfinkel filed a dr with plan in september of 22. Eventual low the Planning Commission foupdz there is no base you and did in the deny the dr on december 15, 2022. We resumed work after august 17, 20 tweet twentythree had we obtained the permits approval from the departments. And red to start construction, mr. Garfinkel filed this appeal with the board. It is yet another attempt it stop the project for in the a good reason. None of hicks arguments are becomed by solid evidence we responded in the our brief showing the impact of the windows that is against mr. Gar if anythingels house and illustrated with before and after elevations. Members of the board it hen a year no work done at this house and i feel bad for the owner. As plans to live as a multigenerational family unit is stalled every step of the way. As unfortunate luck low i dont live next to somebody like mr. Garfinkel i urge the board to deny this ridiculous appeal. We have i question from commissioner trasvina. Can you tell us how long the hughies and mr. Garfinkel lived side by side . I dont know how long than i known each other for a language time at priest since i have been there they were neighbored. Can you describe if you know any of the efforts by your client and your family to meat with and hear any of the occurrence. Mr. Knar finkel. We responded to him his argument for the windows and relocation and new windows not true. The building wasful covered up because it was during construction. So windows that were there before were covered by plywood and cut open again. Can you tell me whether from the your starting point to now whether there was modifications of plans tos address his concerns in the windows were never changed and locations were never changed. No changes in response to. He keep saying we changed it. And our drawings show it never changed. You can check with the Planning Departments to our plans. Throughout the whole process anything changed. Last question i have is the nature of the windows he says you agree to cover obscure or opaque. Where yes. Are they you in opaque. That would reduce the privacy concern. The windows this we proposed could opaque will be but now there is nothing because the work was stopped. So there is mewindows or opaque windows the windows that faces mr. Garfinkels place will be opaque. Thank you. Why now hear from the Planning Departmentful tina tam for planning. 110, 32nd 3 story over basement Single Family dwelling in rhwd. Permit ending with within 124 foil in the merchandise 2022. The permit horizontal addition to the third floor. The addition 200 square feet will be setback sick feet from the Northern Edge and five feet from the southern edge of existing building. Of as you heard the scope of w was approve in the 2016. Because the 2015 permit did expire the owner filed a new worn in 2022. The appellate is sanford garfinkel the owner of 855 elcaminnow del mar to the north. Here is a map showing the property in red. A photograph showing the subject property and the appellates property. During the 311 process mr. Gar if anythingel sited the same privacy issue. The concern the window replacement part of i different permit i understanding f with 6921 filed and approved over the counter in 2021. According to mr. Garfinkel, he is concerned i believe this statute window he is most concerned with highlight in the red. Again this is the property in purple and his property is in green. He is correspond the existing window obscured the bask his property will be replaced with clear glass instead. With clear glass believes they will then therefore impact his privacy. Here is the elevation. North facing. Can you zoom out for me, please . This is the elevation this faces the back of mr. Garfinkely property and had he see when is he looks out from the become of his property the top shows the existing condition. And the lower elevation shows the proposed. You see there is in change in the number of windows or the location. And the sides are the same. One left windo there is 7 here and 7. And 6. What i think his concern is in window. This is the window that has the obscured glass from this window to this window. At the december 15, 22 hearing all the window the be replaced with wood windows to match the design and operation of the existing windows the architect clarified this any window with obscure glass replaced with obscure glass. Noted in the dr memo included in the response Planning Commission voted not take dr and, prove the permit. The project meets the planning code. Design guide line and the 21 window permit not part of this appeal also meet the replacement standards replaced with new of Higher Quality material. Similar size and same location and same design. The Planning Department asked the board deny the appeal andup hold the permit on the bases the permit was proper low reviewd and issued. This concludes my presentation. Why thank you, president swig. Just to re, firm there are nothing that i have heard it is there anything i may have miss third degree has anything to do with any deviation from code, compliance or any statutes this you are sensitive to when approving a project like this . Thanks. I dont think so this permit is for the expansion of the solarrium. Went through 2 review processes. And the issues im hearing is windows not part of the solarrium expansion it is an older permit that was issued and looking back at the older permit complies with code and standards and improvement. There is no. Are there any problems even stretching the bound easier any problems you see with this project. I dont. Not with the windows. That is presented in the issues im hearing tonight. Why are the issues related to the opaque nature of the windows. Memorialized so well is assurance to the neighbor this those will when replaced be opaque . We dont require the windows to be opaque this is the information about it being obscured from the architect at the dr hearing hearing was and recorded. But we dont get in the detail else of glass being obscured or clear. There is a promise from the architect to do this. Given the occurrence of the neighbor and given the openness of the architect to disclose that opaque windows are okay and moving forward this evening and ultimately upholding the appeal approving it and issuing the permit condition this the windows in question and you can provide detail will be, pang and will this be in support of the permit holder. Gi believe so that could work. Perhaps put in writing on the plans this the window with the obscure glass continues to be obscured. We have done this before. Im asking your opinion whether that works. This can work for us as long as for you. Yes. Thank you. Approved plans you in showingly obsecured glass. No nothing from the schedule this00ue say dont they could add this if there is something clarified for the neighbor. But right mou it does not indicate that. To be obscure. A consideration to put on as a condition. And i was asking permission to do this and the appropriate nature. Thank you. Why sure. Thank you. Thank you. We will hear from dbi. Mr. Garfinkel you will have time in rebutel to address the board. Good evening. Matthew green dbi. The original permit for this approved in april 26 of 2017 the application extended to xoiration of april 2021. The original prioration was 2018. The Expiration Date passed with you w starting the following year it did begin and complaints past expiration. It did star in march of 22. There was a complaint building inspector verified the work was starring and permit expired and wrote an nov to renew the permit. Since the w never began prior the renewal permit required rereview by the original city agencies. This is required by dbi the Building Code is updated every 3 years the original approved under the 2013 Building Code the renewal under 2019 code. I would note this had work commenced prior to the Expiration Date the xr review would not have been required the permit would have been renewed sfaft. Fact it never started required the xr review. The permit was, proved properly and recommends you deny the appeal and uphold the permit. Move on to Public Comment is there anyone here . Then in the room and on zoom . I dont see anybody. We will move on to rebutel. Mr. Garfinkel you have 3 minutes to address the board. You are on mute. Okay now. So, im happy you are willing to abide by the decision on replace in kind. Unfortunately the North Elevation is in the correct than i removed the existing obscured glass windows now they want to replace one at the far end. I want all of the existing therapy existing obscure replaces b secure in the just this one that is the requirement i ask. Okay. Thank you. I dont see questions at this time well hear from the permit holder. Members of commission. I would make sure that the claire fight permit that the windows of concern will be of obscure glass. Thank you for this. And thank you for your flexibility. I have a question related to the permit we are talking about now i need clarification and help. The permit is about this section of the husband which is an addition 200 square feet. Yes. The permit is for the solarrium. And the window is just a separate permit this was, proved for the work. But then the concern the nential had we will address those windows is concern. So, we like to talk about the things this we are here to talk about. We are talking about right now the windows we can talk about with regard to this permit are the windows on the solarrium. I believe . Yes. The of mr. Garfinkelments to address all the windows on the north side of the building. Im not i would like to accommodate mr. Garfinkel, seems you are willing to accommodate mr. Garfinkel. No. How far are you willing to go to, we can talk about the features the solarrium stays as is on the building face that faces his building the window that were obscured glass we did not change those windows sizes at all. Will remain obscured. Are they are they it was related this theyre not existing there is no. It was under construction. Why yes and things were taken off and the j. W. Is stopped. Right now there is nothing there. In the schedule of your plans, will are those intended to be obscured. Yes we will rebuild whatever that was taken off i have the driveway rot or to become to had was approved on the plans. When we are talking about commissioner issue im comfortable with had you represented and i hope mr. Garfinkel is comfortable i will in the question you. I so im sure i hope mr. Garfinkel is appreciative. With regard to the windows we are talking about the solarium what is the plan for those windows on the north side. Those will be clear glass. Are those windows a concern of mr. Gar fink nel this case i now confused. No. He has objections but there was denied in the d r. I see. Okay. So if we are to move forward and i think what i will go to discussion i will i know mr. Garfinkel going i want to talk about this. I have esp i will ask him for clarification. Just for the commissioners points of vow we are talking about windows just well and good to know the existing windows will be replace. Thank you. Appreciate it. Thank you. So we will hear from the Planning Department. Apologize i think i miss spoken earlier about the windows. Over head. The obscour window is become here. I dont have confirmation i dont have photographs. In looking at the window schedule it looks like the proposed obscured will be here. There is more obscured or not the 3 that are thrown proposed i cant answer. The 2 neighbors can verify. Would you put this up again. Please. Thank you. All right. So going from how we rowel it left to right. The windows in the addition those are right now scheduled be clear . It was represented by the october and can step up what i heard every other window along that will sufficiented wall merth the top 2 the 2 that are obscured by the print we are on the screen. But are clear on our television and the one that is by the door, are according to the architect are going to be obscured. I see 3 are but not sure about the 2 one below the top 2 and to the left of the middle small one in the middle or the within on the first floor. The windows to the become to the right seem to be in another portion of the building those are not in our purvow in trord this permit, correct . No this window replace am scope is another permit this hen approved and issued it is shown part of this permit for the expansion of the solarrium. But not per of this permit. Was not called out in the project description. There is information in this plan set this is before you. Regarding the windows. Any change condition firmation is in good faith and subject to a new permit. This ship sailed. I believe so but like mr. Grown to confirm. The windows we are talking about exit will excuse me mr. Garfinkel about it is only fair. Are the 2 which are on the far left which are part of the addition, correct . And those biyour right now as far as we know are clear according to the project. According to the window schedule. Mr. Garfinkel did not submit plans to say which were obscured that would have helped us begin the fact we near construction and this evidence is visible to verify. Thank you. Commissioner trasvina. Thank you. President swig and do we refer become to the drawing you had up . Over head. Can you point out where on the the solarrium. Absolutely. I will show you before. It is on top. Preaching there is alreadyave partial penthouse on the fourth floor and want to expand that to include additional Square Footage as part of this that is the scope of permit. How many windows can. Has an interesting angle. If you count it would be 6 on this drawing. And those will be clear or. According to the schedule it is clear. We got 6 windows facing the garfinkel home that are clear. Correct. Thats the permit tonight. Why correct. Below that we have not per of this permit currently higher diagram does not show oshg pang but will be 3. According to this diagram . Correct. And my understanding from the architect is this all of those will be obscure . Or no according to the schedule this is per of permit, only the 3 are shown to be obscure glass. And on the addition on the left side of the right. I mistakenly thought this one was also, it still men that was my understanding from the planner sounds like from the window sded is proposed to be clear out of the multiple efforts by president wigz to have dialogue with the architect and mr. Garfinkel and we are hope to get 6 clear and 3 obscure and Everything Else is clear. Yes , i would like to architect to confirm this this is his submittal and his window schedule to verify that is the case. Thank you. Is there a i think the issue is privacy. And privacy is views are not protected. Where is his house . Upon by what we are seeing is one side we are seeing what he sees from his house. But in the seeing between upon his house and the house next door. And so if the sort sole airium i cannot tell if it is over the top and does in the electric in his house or is it the same height as one of his stories of his house and looks into a bedroom, bathroom, living room or Something Else this is the hard part. If it did look directly this would be who at the same level. Then i would be having a conversation about requiring a level of opaqueness there. But i cant tell. There were light studies dhn being help illustrating the questions you have about height differences and comparisons with the 2 properties so you understand sort of the jukta position of the viewpoints mr. Gar if anythingels property is 3 stores in height. And the street view and the subject property is 3 stories with the fourth penthouse. Do you have a rendering. Can i show it. Can we have a laptop. Commission. Here is the North Elevation the existing north elvision this faces mr. Garfinkels house the blue area is the over lap with the house and the neighbors. And the solarium. Above mr. Garfinkels house and it is set become from the officer deck. Those windows you see on the elevations does not look directly down in mr. Garfinkels house. Windows that were called out has obscured glass was specific low because they are bathrooms the other large glass that you saw at the end is actually. And the window will be glass. So in fact thank you for pointing out. This was my clarification i needed. In fact, this whole solarium is above the roof line of mr. Garfinkels house and in fact is setback from the edge of the officer line. It is set become and well above and setback. So the direct intrusion or privacy issue is not that dynamic and does not seem to be. Dhept line that way so that people inside the solairium will not be looking into the neighbors house. Right. Okay. And again, because we had confusing testimony from planning on which windows are osh secured and not would you point out of one by one the opaque window can devote it on the planning scheme attic. Which is planning president swig. Sure. Thank you. Thank you. Okay. So these 3 are bathroom and they will be obscured. This big one which looks in the deck will be obscured glass. And this is their kitchen window but looks between the house and the adjacent neighbor corridor. Between the 2 building. This would be clear glass. Thank you very much. Everybody i hope everybody is clear now. Commissioner lemberg. We have this up can we have mr. Garfinkel address the windows he is talking about im worried what we are talking about. Yea. Mr. Garfinkel we are in the conversation. I want it make sure we understand we more planning. Okay. Im sorry i did not explain myself more clear in the beginning. Im only concerned with the when were the existing obscure glass windows none of the new above the roof. Not the new stuff only the old stuff and the plans were incorrect than i said they were existing windows there are no existing windows now he wants to put them become in a slight low different location. That is fine im not arguing on that. The plans did not say they would be replace in the kind. Left that off. Now he says he will put them back obscured that were obscured thats all i ask. Please keep it simple i want what was there before. Identify which you expect. Why no. It has been years. And the plans are not aberate. Can you look at the picture and tell us when ones you want obscured the 1 this is he said were doing to be obscured are fine. Okay the ones that were obscured before replacing that will be obscured now. Thats all. Okay. I see on the plans 3 and the architect said this he would agree to have the large window to the left obscured we are adding one. I want to clarify are you happy. There were miles an hour the plans are not accurate he e eliminated windows at 1 time also. Okay. Thank you very much. Thank you. So we will hear from the dbi. To confuse the situation more. There is i 2021 permit and it is to replace all window in kind that is the in the permit we are looking at it has been issued in september of 2021. Expires in august of 2024. And says replace all in kind. And the Planning Departments comments are, approve replacement of all windows with all new clad wood window match existing design and operation. And one new window facing the driveway. My opinion this other permit calls for all them to be replace in the kind and im confused the permit does not address these windows the reason they put the windows on the elevation design to clarify what will be there. Which was approved in i separate perimism im available. Sounds like he is concerned the plans are not consistent with the 2021 plans and want its make sure all of them are replace in the kind but they look different one is missing. So that is something dbi have them correct to make it consistent with the 21 permit. The 2021 permit asked for in kind i dont have the plans here i was not expecting this. We can do a site visit to verify the plans are accurate. Thank you. Commissioners this merit is submitted. Okay who wants to start mr. Eppler. So. I think we understand what the issues are. There are 4 obscured, 3 mall that were identified and the further one that is the deck the second level. This is at the less most of elvisions and although the permit is 4 simple low the solairium i think we could and im going to get confirmation. Grant the appeal and issue the permits on the cannot window on the deck be obscured that will be the condition on guaranteeing the existing permits with that modification. And that should i think address the issues in front of us. I might add and the that the the permit previously issued related to the other windows be installed as in kind. A double insurance we dont have the ability to do this because that is another permit not on the field tone we cant order corrections to that other. Not correcting we are affirming. Im saying that the other i just dont see what the granting of the appeal as presented pleasures the windows referred to are subject to a different permit already approve exclude not appealed. I dont understand when the benefit of that is doing that. The alternative to denight appeal on the base it was properly issued. And go ahead and hope and pray the architects word is word. I upon dont think the architects word has anything to do with at this time work compreliminaried of is in the on this permit at all. It is is how it appears on the plan meches wherevero impact deny the appeal on the bases it was properly issued i would not property granting it. No problem with this. I would agree with commissioner lemberg. I think that consult with his assurance and the architects assurance we have enough to deny the sxael have good faith belief that there will be agreement among all parties. Chime in. I find myself on the other side. We have different and positions im disoriented by that. You know i money i get it this permit i think sometimes we go outside of the scope of a permit when we try to remedy issue and do not going to deny if we feel comfortable with assurances made i can as well. I would be comfortable supporting commissioner lembergs commission deny the appeal because all the stuff we have been talking about which considered in the permit are okay. So when are we talking about moving forward. Go for temperature move to deny on the basis it was purposely issued. Commissioner eppler . So we have a motion from commissioner lemberg to deny and uphold the permit on the billses it was proper leave issued you want to add and windows in the separate permit. So commissioner on that motion commissioner trasvina. Aye commissioner eppler. Why aye president swig. That concludes the hearing. Thank you, everybody. Clear clear thanks. I example the first thing to point out is the first word is camp tlargz to be bugs and dirt and so long as you can get past that part in place is pretty awesome. Youre going to get to our cabin and why is it so small well most of your time is spent outside. Programming was our first step we wanted to offer a program that is, you know, makes people happy and leaves them with memories. Here and there. So more points. Ready 1, 2, 3. I think a big part is its coming from San Francisco it is real estate a kind of vibe people relate to each other and everyones living in the city and you can feel the breath of fetish air and the experience you get out here. I think it give us an opportunity to get away from technology you come out here and look at it here and not look at our iphones and you kind of lose users in the city and have a cup of coffee im corey a typical day increase no typical day. And just the first time being on the talent show and getting a huge applause and i never expected it is is r is a great experience im an executive chief here at kathy serve over one hundred meals a day for the camp mather folks. People love our meals and the idea they can pick up a meal and dont worry about shopping or doing dishes and enjoy and have a great time at camp mather grasping grab on. I like camp mather it is a lot of freedom and kids run around its great. They have all the things i dont have to do the kids get to do what they want to do and we basically focus on them thats our only job. I like camp mather because i can ride my bike. I love camp mather. The children are up here playing around and riding their booiths bicycles thats a great place to see what the word is like outside of the city. [music] San Francisco is known as yerba buena, good herb after a mint that used to grow here. At this time there were 3 settlements one was mission delores. One the presidio and one was yerba buena which was urban center. There were 800 people in 1848 it was small. A lot of Historic Buildings were here including pony express headquarters. Wells fargo. Hudson Bay Trading Company and famous early settlers one of whom william leaderdorph who lived blocks from here a successful business person. Africanamerican decent and the first million airin california. Wilwoman was the founders of San Francisco. Here during the gold rush came in the early 1840s. He spent time stake himself as a merchant seaman and a business person. His father and brother in new orleans. We know him for San Franciscos history. Establishing himself here arnold 18 twoochl he did one of many things the first to do in yerba buena. Was not california yet and was not fully San Francisco yet. Because he was an american citizen but spoke spanish he was able to during the time when america was taking over california from mexico, there was annexations that happened and conflict emerging and war, of course. He was part of the peek deliberations and am bas doorship to create the state of california a vice council to mexico. Mexico granted him citizenship. He loaned the government of San Francisco money. To funds some of the war efforts to establish the city itself and the state, of course. He established the first hotel here the person people turned to often to receive dignitaries or hold large gatherings established the First Public School here and helped start the Public School system. He piloted the first steam ship on the bay. A big event for San Francisco and depict instead state seal the ship was the sitk a. There is a small 4 block long length of street, owned much of that runs essentially where the transamerica building is to it ends at california. I walk today before am a cute side street. At this point t is the center what was all his property. He was the person entrusted to be the citys first treasurer. That is i big deal of itself to have that legacy part of an africanamerican the citys first banker. He was not only a forefather of the establishment of San Francisco and california as a state but a leader in industry. He had a direct hahn in so many things that we look at in San Francisco. Part of our dna. You know you dont hear his anymore in the context of those. Representation matters. You need to uplift this so people know him but people like him like me. Like you. Like anyone who looks like him to be, i can do this, too. To have the citys first banker and a street in the middle of financial district. That alone is powerful. [music] [ ] i just dont know that you can find a neighborhood in the city where you can hear music stands and take a ride on the low rider down the street. It is an experience that you cant have anywhere else in San Francisco. [ ] [ ] district nine is a in the southeast portion of the city. We have four neighborhoods that i represent. St. Marys park has a completely unique architecture. Very distinct feel, and it is a very close to holly park which is another beautiful park in San Francisco. The Bernal Heights district is unique in that we have the hell which has one of the best views in all of San Francisco. There is a swinging hanging from a tree at the top. It is as if you are swinging over the entire city. There are two unique aspects. It is considered the fourth chinatown in San Francisco. Sixty of the residents are of chinese ancestry. The second unique, and fun aspect about this area is it is the garden district. There is a lot of urban agriculture and it was where the city grew the majority of the flowers. Not only for San Francisco but for the region. And of course, it is the location in mclaren park which is the citys second biggest park after golden gate. Many people dont know the neighborhood in the first place if they havent been there. We call it the best neighborhood nobody has ever heard our. Every neighborhood in district nine has a very special aspect. Where we are right now is the Mission District. The Mission District is a very special part of our city. You smell the tacos at the [speaking spanish] and they have the best latin pastries. They have these shortbread cookies with caramel in the middle. And then you walk further down and you have sunrise cafe. It is a place that you come for the incredible food, but also to learn about what is happening in the neighborhood and how you can help and support your community. Twentyfourth street is the birthplace of the movement. We have over 620 murals. It is the largest outdoor Public Gallery in the country and possibly the world. You can find so much Political Engagement park next to so much incredible art. Its another reason why we think this is a cultural district that we must preserve. [ ] it was formed in 2014. We had been an organization that had been around for over 20 years. We worked a lot in the neighborhood around life issues. Most recently, in 2012, there were issues around gentrification in the neighborhood. So the idea of forming the cultural district was to help preserve the history and the culture that is in this neighborhood for the future of families and generations. In the past decade, 8,000 latino residents in the Mission District have been displaced from their community. We all know that the rising cost of living in San Francisco has led to many people being displaced. Lower and middle income all over the city. Because it there is richness in this neighborhood that i also mentioned the fact it is flat and so accessible by trip public transportation, has, has made it very popular. Its a struggle for us right now, you know, when you get a lot of development coming to an area, a lot of new people coming to the area with different sets of values and different culture. There is a lot of struggle between the existing community and the newness coming in. There are some things that we do to try to slow it down so it doesnt completely erase the communities. We try to have developments that is more in tune with the community and more Equitable Development in the area. You need to meet with and gain the support and find out the needs of the neighborhoods. The people on the businesses that came before you. You need to dialogue and show respect. And then figure out how to bring in the new, without displacing the old. [ ] i hope we can reset a lot of the mission that we have lost in the last 20 years. So we will be bringing in a lot of folks into the neighborhoods pick when we do that, there is a demand or, you know, certain types of services that pertain more to the local community and workingclass. Back in the day, we looked at mission street, and now it does not look and feel anything like mission street. This is the last stand of the latino concentrated arts, culture and cuisine and people. We created a cultural district to do our best to conserve that feeling. That is what makes our city so cosmopolitan and diverse and makes us the envy of the world. We have these unique neighborhoods with so much cultural presence and learnings, that we want to preserve. [ ]