And we have chris buck, with San Francisco public works and turn off all cellphones. Appellants, permit holders and Department Respondents are given seven minutes and three minutes for rebuttal. People affiliated must include their comments within the periods. Members of the public who are not affiliated with the parties, have up to three minutes each to address the board with no rebuttal and time may be limited to two minutes if there are a large number of speakers. Our legal clerk will give you a verbal warning before your time suppose. Four votes are needed. If you have questions about requesting a rehearing the board rules are hearing schedule email board staff. Regarding Public Access and participation. They are paramount importance to the board and they will replicate the inperson hearing process. We are broadcasting and streaming this hearing live and we will have the ability to receive Public Comments for each item on todays agenda. To watch on tv go to cable channel 78. It wil
Welcome to the july 23 twep twenty. Im supervisor chair of the meeting. Do you have any announcements . yes. Due to the covid 19 Health Emergency and to protect Board Members City Employees and the public. The chambers are closed. This precaution is pursuant to the state wide stay at home order and complies with all the regulations and directives. Public comment will be available on each item on the agenda. Both channel 26 and sfgovtv. By calling 415 6550001. The meeting i. D is 126 4284197 press pound and pound again. When connected youll hear the meeting discussions but be on mute. And in listening mode only. When your item of interest comes up police press star three to be added to the speaker line. Best practices are to call from a quiet location. You may submit Public Comment by emailing myself the joint City School Board and city clerk. If you submit Public Comment via email it will be forwarded to the board of supervisors and submitted as part of the file. thank you. Can you ple
What you can to see if there is any support that can be provided to bring him and if it is possible to authorize a statement of support on behalf of the San Francisco resident and his family, who has dedicated themselves to San Francisco. The second would be with regard to the cease and desist order to the massage therapists, im just wondering if there is administrative relief that we can do, even though there is an ordinance that is in the hands of the board of supervisors. The department here has a role in providing some directionality , particularly given the testimony here, and i guess they report back to us in terms of what can be provided. Thank you. Thank you, commissioners. Item nine is reported back from the august 27th, 2019 meeting. Im bringing you my last announcement that you can read off of. Thank you. [indiscernible] could you craft up the document about the [indiscernible] yes, thank you. I will remind you what happened in this. This is just august 27th, i should rememb
Administrator, also representing the Planning Department and planning commission. We have chief building inspector, mauriceo hernandez and sen erin respec inspector be kernin and we have the Environmental Health branch of department of publichealth. The Board Meeting guidelines are as follows, the board request you turn off or silence all phones and other Electronic Devices so they will not disturb the proceedings. Carry on conversations in the hallway. Appellants. Permit holders and Department Respondents are given seven minutes to present and three minutes for rebuttal. People must include their comments within the three or sevenminute periods. Members not affiliated have up to three minutes each to address the board and no rebuttal. Please speak into the microphone. To assist board in the accurate preparation of minutes, you are asked but not required to submit a speaker card or Business Card to board staff when you come up to speak. Speaker cards are available on the left side of t
Stephen chan, the jason neighbor to the west of the proposed project is concerned that the proposed height of the vertical addition is not compatible with the residential Design Guidelines. The proposed alternatives are setbacks to the third floor so that the scale matches other buildings on the block and does not block light and secondly to move the elevator so it does not to match his a little existing light well on the west side. The second d. R. Requester, a neighbor to the south of the proposed project is concerned with the proposed addition is a demolition and should be reviewed as such, and number two , the measurement of the project height is erroneous and exceeds the allowable height prescribed by the planning code and that the proposed addition is not compatible with the following residential Design Guidelines. To his proposed alternative is to limit the fourth floor. Public comment to date, the department his receipt four letters and opposition in four letters in support of