To my left is thomas owen and gary the local assistant executive director. Were joined by representatives from the city departments that have cases before this board. Sitting at the table in the front is Scott Sanchez the city Zoning Administrator here representing the Planning Department and the Planning Commission as well and in a moment well see building inspector joe duffy return to the room representing the please be advised the ringing of and use of cell phones and other Electronic Devices are prohibited. Out in the hallway. Permit holders and others have up to 7 minutes to present their case and 3 minutes for rebuttal. People affiliated with these parties must conclude their comments within 7 minutes, participants not affiliated have up to 3 minutes no rebuttal. To assist the board in the accurate preparation of the minutes, members of the public are asked, not required to submit a speaker card or Business Card to the clerk. The board welcomes your comments. There are Customer Satisfaction forms available. If you have a question about the schedule, speak to the staff after the meeting or call the board office tomorrow we are located at 1650 mission street, suite 304. This meeting is broadcast live on sfgovtv cable channel 78. Dvds are available to purchase directly from sfgovtv. Thank you for your attention. Well conduct our swearing in process. If you intend to testify and wish to have the board give your testimony evidentiary weight, please stand and say i do. Please note any of the members may speak without taking so if you could your right hand swear or affirm the testimony youre about to give will be the whole truth and nothing but the truth . I do. Thank you very much. Commissioner president honda and supervisors we have one housekeeping item has to do with with item 5 appeal 16 danish zero regardi0 regarding 16th avenue a permit has been cancelled at the appeal is no longer under the boards jurisdiction and will not be heard tonight well move on to item one general Public Comment this is the opportunity time, members of the public may address the commission on items of interest to the public that are within the subject matter jurisdiction any public general Public Comment seeing none, item 2 commissioner questions or comments commissioners okay. Then item 3 is the boards consideration of minutes of october 26, 2016. Unless additions or changes can i have a motion . To accept those. So moved. Any Public Comment on the minutes seeing none, a motion if commissioner lazarus to adopt the minutes on that motion commissioner fung commissioner president honda commissioner wilson is absent commissioner swig. Okay. That motion carries with a vote of 4 to zero thank you very much item 4 was continued last time for commissioner wilson participation with the president s agreement we will hold off on that item and move to the next item on the calendar item 5 is dismissed item 6 appeal wang versus the Zoning Administrator on merry lemon drive of a notice of violation and penalty alleging the code with the use of the the subject property on the limitations for the accessary dwellings and the appellant is the appellant in the room . Please step forward thank you you have 7 minutes to address the board okay. Please bring the microphone down to speak into that. Good evening and welcome. And thank you for being patient. Should i say first . Okay. This is for any friends he set up the inspector he didnt really have the violation because i have two friends and the friends and family going to the address but the inspector say he is operating a business is violates the code so we just want to resolve this probl problem. Is that it. Yes. This problem too many friends. A questions are you aware of the conversation between you and the department because it is dated in our brief let me talk first although. How much time do you call the department and what were the responses. According to the paper and email he probably called during the hours i know the inspector only will accept before 8 possibly why they never get a bill from the station with the inspector matthews the inspector. So how many times a lot of times i look at them probably 20 times. And never, never once did the Department Person call you back. I think the from time to time they did but maybe i didnt pick up the phone in the meantime they not connect with each other. Okay. The only time i think they really connect to each other through the email. So the person that lives at the address is he present. Yes. Maybe i can help answer speak some of the questions come to the podium. State your name for the record. Im van. So the question is how much time do you call the department and what. More than ten times and during that time. During the time we kept the letter we emailed more than ten times i cant remember how much time my Office Workers call having to send an email too you know no notice and until we got the fine letter you know then he answered the one time thats all. Okay. Thank you very much. Okay. Thats it thank you. Thank you. Mr. Sanchez. Thank you Scott SanchezPlanning Department. The subject property mira loma within an radically there are limited uses allowed as accessory to a accessary dwelling in a Residential Zoning District not maintenance of stoke and trade and not employees earlier this year the complaint to may we received complaints from the public that there was an ongoing business at the the subject property employees were coming and going our understanding being used just to the dwelling for storage and equipment for Electrical Contractor in the morning employees we are picking up equipment and going out for jobs during the day they were doing this early there were contemplates not insistent of a Residential District in question started our process with a site visit that is correspondence with mr. Oneway and our staff as well as phone calls record up to and including the day the appeal was filed that email what staff worked out over the time it was ongoing discussion with the Planning Department i cant say what who is not calling them back from the lowers from the staff we were trying to resolve the staff to depreciated it to a manner we believe that reduced the impacts on the neighbors and that happened the day before the appeal was filed and was agreed theyll be more mindful and not have their employees coming out to the property for limited as recommended by mr. Wang an emergency if they had an employee that needed something from a job and the night before pickup in the morning that happened on the curve were trying to work with them we know those are not uncommon types of used for the Residential District but want to address the concerns of the neighbors so thats right the point we were at in august and again have regular communications theyve admitted two complaints on the property one planning went to building and inspector duffy can address the complaint 329 department of building inspection but it sounds like that was verified it was used for storage Electrical Equipment which is not the thing that is allowed under the planning code but we are trying to work with them to come up with a way of addressing that will allow them to have a business but reduce the impacts on neighbors and make that more residential in character after the appeal was filed i had my staff reach out to the appellate and try to get a better understanding of what was going on based on those communications they were appealing the staff time we charge for cover time and materials we spent on enforcement this is not appealable it says in the letter itself explicit the time and materials is not appealable that is just time and material and wear allotted to collect that weve not been assessing penalties under this property theyve been working with us coming into compliance no outstanding penalty but they have an outstanding material charges approximately 1,200 outlined in the letter thats where we are at today im available to answer any questions. I have a couple of mr. Sanchez how do you track when in coming calls are taken and emails are returned i mean going off the briefs and you know this seems to be not enough Fair Exchange of information according to the brief we received. I think one of the points two enforcement cases i dont know if they specified who was not returning their calls. Certainly in our notice of violation penalty is documented conversations that weve had with them additionally i mean, i have an email he can pass up to the board you know june 8th emailed to mr. Wang describing the notice of enforcement and the code compliant and an analogy on the ninth and june 9th mr. Wang during the phone calls describing the planning code permission this is no early august and august 22nd i mean interest is evidence of the emails i dont know when theyre saying staff if call them back evidence was communicated to resolve the complainant we thought was resolved the day before. Is there a set policy when the public calls. Yes. The goal is twentyfour hours we do our best and at staff has more than one thousand cases we have an enforcement staff but we try to respond to everyone in a timing fashion i believe mike what ill hearing from the appellant no communication is not what the fact support as this case im reading from the. The problem, no brief. No information here. All we have is one page of the appellant that didnt say anything to provide new details to what their allegations are and have no information or from the department other than the letter. Thats correct. Thank you mr. Sanchez. Thank you. Let me just i mean there is a gentlemans name mentions in the Public Document that persons name is a nonrichmond party but ii agree with commissioner fung what we have the appellant saying ive called them a bunch of time but no documentation on that and youre reading from your information which clearly is documents but we dont have it in our brief and so it is were stuck we said she said may i ask you what this is all about so i can ask the appellant something latter please. What . All about someone doing business out of a residence this is not right; correct . You can will have a home based bus but it neatest to needs to be done in a residential manner. They were operating a nuisance in the eyes of the neighbors was created as to materials being im imagining the materials from the homes a garage being up used as a warehouse possibly stuff like that. And coming and going. One of the main things people are woolken up the nov was filed based on the complaint of the neighbors and even if no emails communication and something that was satisfactory to your department. The have addressed it we did inform them only august 22nd well keep the can i go e case open in the case there are further complaint to readily monitor it we outlined how they can comply and there was agreement at that time. With that said the issue the 1,270 of staff time and expenses related to this case and appropriate under the planning code. As not in our notice of violation not appealable ill note the cost to file the appeal is 600 that is half of the materials. Okay. So what we are talking about here as far as im concerned, the appeal is on the notice of violation but about the dwelling units. Thats what i understood from the subsequent communications. Ill ask that from the appellant. Mr. Sanchez one 09 point of your letter indicates photos. Do you have those i dont have those with me but maybe ill get them online. Commissioners did you want to hear from inspector duffy. Not before you. Any Public Comment . Seeing none, there is rebuttal for the appellant and the president as questions so if you could come back please. You have any rebuttal that you want to add. Im sorry, i understand the situation is because he doesnt know what the violation code is but he received a letter on january 15th and clean up the place already told the people not to come to the house it is very quiet so as matthew the inspector say he still seeing people in and out of the house so it is excess to that that you have operating and still in violated the law and served him i mean the payment was one thousand 2 hundred something i understand he try to call and someone said not to appeal it wont do you, you any good thats why we are here. So just a couple of things first of all, as the Zoning Administrator judge said in the planning code there are stated fees that are associated with and a with a notice of violation this thing violation came as a result of a neighbor complaint that is unanimous but when you file on appeal it costs 650 and then in the planning code if the Planning Department has to come out and investigate unfortunately where the person theyre investigating has to pay for the time of the investigation and the materials so the 1,270 is the 650 appeal cost and that time and. I did huh . Separate. That is on top of the departments t and m costs. This is the law nonnegotiable and it comes with you have a notice of violation what is concerning to me id like to ask i guess your friend or client or appellant. There seems to be a record of conversation as of the Zoning Administrator just was reading from june 8th, june 9th and august 20th and 21st felt a conversation ongoing between yourself and the Planning Department and so you understand there was conversation regardless of telephone calls in the night and the Zoning Administrator stated he worked you, you to resolve the issue and you agreed to do that that was to be quiet in the morning and keep everything suitable for your neighbors so in your eyes was there that conversation. Where is the email. I where is the emails. Theyll get answered. The question is the commissioner swig is asking did the receive emails from the department. Off of that. So what is making me scratching my head the Zoning Administrator said in june and again in august he has recordings and emails that there was a negotiation a notice that you can fix this well help you and there was a resolution sometime around august 22nd from the Zoning Administrator who was the Zoning Administrator talking to if he wasnt talking to you beyond this. I think that he wanted to talk with inspector matthew i understand that the inspector is not normally at the office thats why he never really get a chance to talk with him and he just had to tell his friend that someone got email from the party. So he there heres the thing the Zoning Administrator somebody in planning was communicating with the that mr. Wang im sorry mr. Wang or something in your office there was a dialogue blavrt and it was a good dialogue and resulted in the Planning Department considered a resolution it is done everything is fine but now you say no communication which something is and the main thing i wanted to talk with mr. Matthew not a chance to talk with him thats why he considered no communication. We understand that but were emails received it all by anybody . So the point he didnt get a good communication i saw the email i know there was some communication but hes open thinking. Regardless of ohio when a notice of violation occurs automatically according to the law fees are charged they have time and they are expenses related to enforcing that notice of violation so and thats a nonnegotiable situation nonappealable situation at the least youll have to pay the 1,200. Thats the problem im not bio rated. Can you speak into the microphone please. I think the timeline and maybe well get clarification from maybe the Zoning Administrator i think they felt they were wander correct me if i am wrong that you were wander and had communication and thought you fixed it and the notice of violation came after is that what youre saying. I received the first violation and fixed it the inspector came in and fixed the problem in march so in june the is okay. This is the violation its not fixed thats why he didnt understand that according to the record it was abated. I think well get clarification from the department thank you. Thank you. Yeah. Thank you. Mr. Sanchez. That he fixed it. Okay Scott SanchezPlanning Department. Put on to clear this up. Emails lets see so next time maybe a case like this youll want to help us send along the emails and everything in the brief please. Yes. Over the overhead an email from our staff to mr. Wang and. Can the expand a little bit so i can read the letters. One question before you start going the day you said you had conversations in march and in june thats when the notice of violation came i think the clarification in the timeline of that so you mentioned conversations in july and august maybe you can help to clear that up mr. Sanchez. So there was as i mentioned a separate case from Building Department it was opened no january and that was about storage of materials that appears to be resolved in march and the case was closed in march then the planning complaints was first really appears to be received in early may so theres. Basically two cases theyre talking about the resolution of the first case this is the second case. Right may 9 a notice of complaint and then on june 6th we submitted our notice of enforcement then june 8th staff had contacts on june 8th and 9 with mr. Wang following that additional evidence in july the complaint was ongoing and on july 27th staff observed the vehicles arriving at the property going to the garage and picking up materials then on june july 27th we sent an email to mr. Wang with the the notice of violation was not issued until july 17th the general timeline let me go back to some of the thats fine. When did the resolution you mentioned. August 22n