Thats in general protection of the property. There are concerns about how this work is going to be done, given that breaking up the concrete in this particular way is a little bit more invasive, doing it onsite than it would otherwise be for cages where you normally just put rocks into the cages. Do you dispute the design they have come up with is compliant with the building and planning code . Yes. We would not be here otherwise. So what part of the Building Code does it violate . I believe its stated in our brief, and i believe mr. Paul can attest to better. We took issue with some of the engineering calculations and what was submitted in that regard. I dont think thats in the brief, actually. He has a if you would like to hear from our from an engineering standpoint theres no question pending. The design process its okay. I think you have a part in the brief here. I did have a question, ms. Raphael, if you did have a settlement, and you did have this design for five years, why was t
Might happen to this property, and it feels difficult to make a decision based on speculation. President melgar commissioner moore. Commissioner moore thank you for expressing it as well as you did, commissioner johnson, because i say it slightly different, although i say the same. And then, i feel resonance in our Environmental Review officer, miss gibson, in stating there is an impact, and the mitigation which has so little teeth to it, that we cant believe that it would work, and that is basically where we are. Its basically i dont know. Ive never found myself in that kind of a situation. President melgar director rahaim. Director rahaim so i think maybe a couple of things that need to be clarified to the board. The boards decision was that they found that there may be and the operative word here is there may be an environmental impact. The language that mr. Drury put up on the screen is there may be an impact, and directed them to do an environmental analysis. And that impact was f
Building inspector. And we also expect chris buck, urban forester with San Francisco public works. The Board Meeting guidelines are as follows. We request that you silence all phones and other devices so they will not disturb the proceedings. Please carry on conversations in the hallway. Each are given seven minutes to present their case and three minutes for rebuttal. People affiliated with the party must include comments. Members not affiliated with the parties have three minutes each to address the board. To assist the board in accurate preparation of minutes, youre asked to provide a name. Speaker cards are available on the left side of the podium. The board reserves the right to not call an item after 10 p. M. Please speak to board staff during the break, or after the meeting. We are located at 1650 mission street. This will be rebroadcast on fridays on channel 26. The video is available on our website and can be downloaded from sfgovtv. Now well swear in or affirm all those who i
This block. So this is not a normal air and light situation. This is one where the building was specifically designed with purpose and access. It talks to the design intent and design characteristics that makes coxhead such a significant architect. And i believe that requires more deference, and it disturbs me that i have not heard that addressed in the pmnd as a historic character issue. Its not just the views out, it is how the light comes into the house and plays with the interior design, which was a very purposeful part of the architecture. Thank you. President melgar thank you. Next speaker, please. Honorable commissioners, my father president melgar i think you are youre part of mr. Kaufmans team. Yeah, so i cant speak. President melgar yeah. You can speak during rebuttal. Hes mr. Kaufmans son, but he does not live at the property. Therefore, hes a member of the public living at a separate address. President melgar City Attorney, what do you think . [inaudible] president melgar o
We have a quorum. Next is item b. The oath. Will all parties giving testimony today please stand and raise your right hand. You may be seated. For your information, i want to let everyone know the department will present the case first, then appellant. Each side has seven minutes. Next is Public Comments with three members each to speak. Lastly rebuttal for three minutes for the department then appellant. C approval of minutes, discussion and possible action to adopt the minutes for a meeting held on october 16, 2019. Move to approve. Second. Is there any Public Comment on the minutes . Seeing none are all in favor . Aye. Any opposed. Minutes approved. Item d. Continued new appeals. Board of abatement. 6867. 109113 pierce street. Action asked by applelant complaint 201889001 to be returned to staff and cancel the notice of abatement. Would the Department Like to come forward . Good morning, chief Housing Inspector. We are here again after the case last month was continued. I spent some