Notice has a description that referenced a four story project. It definitely referenced the newer plans. They are not what the old plans were, as mentioned. Thank you. Commissioners the matter is submitted. Time is over. I will start. One, it is really difficult to hear a case just orally, and that is why briefs are submitted and had certain questions been asked maybe some of those could have been answered here this evening. Other than that, i feel that this is a conforming project. It has gone on a long time there. Are no exemptions, no rare variances required. I feel a reason to deny the appeal and accept the project as it is. So if those plans if the correct plans would have been sent out, and that is the big thing in this conversation tonight, if those plans, the right plans would have come out and there would have been a Community Uproar on those plans for the reasons that have been also mentioned tonight, which is primarily the fourth floor and some view quarters, i would have lo
I did review the 311 notice and the plans that were provided by the neighbor. It was clear that the notice itself was the new notice from 2017. It clearly stated it was going to four stories. The plans that they have are the old plans from 2013, 2014. I have no way of knowing if those are the plans that were included with that notice last year because those plans were only dated as to when they were, you know, drawn by the designer. Not when they were mailed out or included in the 311 packet. So i cant corroborate that is the those are the actual plans that were sent with that 311 notice, whether thats the truth or not. All i do know that issue was not raised in the appeal. It was not raised in a brief. It has not been raised by any neighbors to our knowledge to either the project sponsor or the department staff. That includes potentially being raised by the neighbor to the north who originally dred the project and chose not to dr it based on revised plans. In order to get anymore info
Keeping hard copies of jobs that go out in terms how long they keep those physical documents. I havent had a chance to request that. Because it appears that the transmittal of information from the Planning Department to repo mill were correct. That is the only kind of area that we havent been able to explore thoroughly yet. I want to follow up the 3 11 notice has a description that referenced a four story project. It definitely referenced the newer plans. They are not what the old plans were, as mentioned. Thank you. Commissioners the matter is submitted. Time is over. I will start. One, it is really difficult to hear a case just orally, and that is why briefs are submitted and had certain questions been asked maybe some of those could have been answered here this evening. Other than that, i feel that this is a conforming project. It has gone on a long time there. Are no exemptions, no rare variances required. I feel a reason to deny the appeal and accept the project as it is. So if th
Devices. Items acted upon today will appear on the january 15th board of supervisors agenda unless otherwise stated. Thank you, id like to thank sfgtv which televises us each meeting. Id like to say we have 7 items on the agenda today. Madam clerk, please call item 1. Item 1 is a resolution granting a street encroachment at 54 peralta avenue for construction of a driveway ramp. Sponsor is david chiu and from dpw we have david qwan my name is eleanor tapk and i am with the department of public works. Our office received a major encroachment request from sia consulting on october 26, 2011. The request is to remove and reconstruction a portion of the cityowned maintaining wall to construct a concrete driveway ramp with transition slope to conform to the existing sidewalk grade in order to provide vehicle access to the property at 54 peralta. We have reviewed project, the project has been routed to city planning for them to review on the conformity to the general plan and we receive a lett
Is eric mar, chairman of the committee, our clerk is miss alisa miller. Miss miller, are there announcements for us . Please make sure to silence all cell phones and electronic devices. Items acted upon today will appear on the january 15th board of supervisors agenda unless otherwise stated. Thank you, id like to thank sfgtv which televises us each meeting. Id like to say we have 7 items on the agenda today. Madam clerk, please call item 1. Item 1 is a resolution granting a street encroachment at 54 peralta avenue for construction of a driveway ramp. Sponsor is david chiu and from dpw we have david qwan my name is eleanor tapk and i am with the department of public works. Our office received a major encroachment request from sia consulting on october 26, 2011. The request is to remove and reconstruction a portion of the cityowned maintaining wall to construct a concrete driveway ramp with transition slope to conform to the existing sidewalk grade in order to provide vehicle access to