[inaudible] clerk okay. That motion carries 40. The matter is continued to august 12. Okay. So now, we are moving onto item number 1, which is general Public Comment. This is an opportunity for anyone who would like to speak on a matter within the boards jurisdiction but is not on tonights calendar. If you do want to speak in general Public Comment, please raise your hand. We do have a comment from zach karnazes. Alec will queue up the video. Im having to read this Public Comment from bed because im having some Health Problems right now. I want to thank Julie Rosenberg for her help in making sure that access is improved for board of appeals meetings. She has done more than almost any City Employee that i know of to help with the disabled accessing public meetings. I think theres still a ways to go for large volumes of people, like over 50 or over 20. Its still really hard, but for the smaller volume meetings, its been extremely helpful, and im very grateful to here. Im concerned at the deforestation thats happening in our city right now. Hayes and octavia, department of forestry has been cutting more of our trees down during the covid19 pandemic when people do not have the ability when theyre sheltering in place. Im concerned that the department of public works is exploiting this pandemic to further their agenda for cutting down trees, and in the longterm, promotes Construction Projects, which promotes gentrification of our city. I hope this board can appreciate the severity of whats happening right now, and really consider these appeals, especially when forestry is cutting down trees. That is the end of my comment. My name is zach karnazes. Clerk and we will hear from mr. Segobia. Can we spotlight mr. Segobia, please . Mr. Segobia . Yes. Clerk okay. Go ahead. Ive lived in the Mission District since 1953, and i realize that the trees on our street are making a lot of damage on our streets. My concern is somebody is going to get killed. Somebody some little kid, and somebody is going to get hurt. My wife happened to be walking down 24 street. She tripped on the tree thats coming up out of the ground and hurt herself. Im more concerned that these roots are going to go underneath the ground, hurt something, a gas line, so i dont like to see these things go. I love trees, but this is becoming a hazard on 24 street. I think three or four trees have already fell. Im afraid some young kid or somebodys going to get hurt. Its like an accident thats getting ready to happen. My wife is here, and she fell down because the sidewalks are coming up because the roots of these trees are really messing up and really messing up our sidewalk. Id like to see some kid or somebody really getting hurt on our streets. Or somebody is in a wheelchair, and they cant get on the sidewalk. Or they have a scooter, and the sidewalk, its cracked and sitting high because of the roots, and it tips them over. If we can provide a sidewalk thats safe for every pedestrian and disability people, that would be wonderful, and there would be no more hazard and no more falling on these crooked sidewalks. My wife did take a fall. Yeah, i did take a fall there, and i just dont think that trees should be in the city. They should be in the country. Theres nowhere to let the trees go. Were suffocating them. We need to let the trees grow in the country. And i think they really planted the wrong kind of trees on 24 street, not aware of what they were supposed to do. Clerk okay. Thank you. Youre welcome. Clerk okay. Any other Public Comment. If so, please raise your hand. Okay. Im not seeing any, so were going to move onto commissioner comments and questions. I have one comment to make. I want to commend miss rosenberg and her staff and members of the public tuning in and commenting. Shes made this as easy as possible. I know weve had some growing pains, and julie, you have ma this as easy as possible. Second. Yeah, i second that. Thank you. Amazing work. Julie, youre muted. Mics off, julie. Your mic is off. Its on your end, julie. I think its your computer. You might want to check that. We cant hear you, julie. Even though it looks like your mics on. Clerk one moment. You got it now. Okay. See . Technical problems, just when youre giving me a compliment. Well, i dont see any Public Comment on this item, which well move onto the adoption of the minutes. Before you are the adoption of the july 20, 2020 meeting. Commissioners, any additions, deletions, corrections to the minutes . Motion to adopt the minutes. Clerk okay. We have a motion from commissioner swig to adopt the minutes. Any Public Comment . I had someone i thought, but i dont think theyre here. Anyone, raise your hand. Okay. So i dont see anyone. So on that motion [roll call] clerk okay. So that motion carries, 40, and the minutes are adopted. So we are now moving onto item number 5. This is the hearing request for appeal 20034, subject property at 1501 quint street. Zach karnazes is requesting a rehearing in appeal 20034. At that time, the board voted 40, commissioner santacana absent, to grant the appeal and issue the order on the condition that it be revised to require that the project manager not close out the project until the additional tree is planted. These seven trees are in addition to the replacement trees specified in the order, on the basis that this will enhance the health and beauty of the neighborhood. This is zach karnazes, appellant. I am asking for a continuance for this item. I was denied the at the wacont when i cant be there because of Health Problems. Mohamed nuru, director of t, d arrested by the f. B. I. , and by granting this permit, the board of appeals is encouraging the department of public works to do more illegal tree removals, and they already have been happening on octavia and a bunch of other parts of the city. I raised a bunch of disability issues and had a bunch of accessible issues on the january 7, 2020 meeting. I was not given a powerpoint presentation, even though i was told months before that i would need to appear by phone. The presentation used by the department of public works was not provided to me, and i had to request the call in information multiple times to get a chance to call in. I asked if i could communicate with people that were present at the meeting, if they would mind sharing information with me, and sthey refused to do this. I did not get these denials and these explanations for these denials until 2. 5 hours before the appeals hearing on this item even though i had asked these questions months, months and months prior. Christopher buck waited until the very last moment to give me any information on that. Made my appeal very difficult. Thank you for considering this request for a rehearing, and i really hope the board of appeals will recognize that illegal behavior has happened, and i hope the board of appeal will consider the actions of this company in other matters. Clerk okay. Thank you, mr. Karnazes. We will now hear from the department of public works. Thank you. Sorry. Can you hear me . Clerk yes, we can. Great. Thank you. Public works, weve listened to the appellant and the commissioners, and as a result, weve g weve begun implementing changes in our tree removals. Weve acknowledged our premature removal of the tree on quint street, and weve offered restitution in the form of Additional Replacement trees beyond those that are already considered in exchange, and weve attended and responded to several rounds of appeal, including tonights rehearing. Weve reviewed the information, as well as the request for rehearing today, and we dont believe theres any basis to issue the appeal in this case. The appellant has not articulated any specific terms of an outcome that he thinks would be reasonable, so we do not know how, at this point, we can contribute further to the case. While the decision to move forward with this project continues to be held in limbo, stakeholders and residents continue to suffer potential delays to completing the project, so we respectfully ask that the board uphold the previous decision, and were happy to answer any questions the commissioners may have. Thank you. Clerk we do have a question from Vice President honda. So, sir, had the if the permit was revoked, at what cost to the city i dont expect you to know the preside cost, but do you have any idea of what that cost or would cost the city . I dont have a way to put a dollar on it. It would have cost more for the safety. One of the intents was to improve the safety. Stopping the project and restarting it would reintroduce some of those health and safety issues, not to mention whatever costs were spent so far to do the construction to date that has to be undone, we would not recoup that. We would be spending more to put it back the way it was. Are we talking about hundreds, thousands, tens of thousands, hundreds of thousands . Regarding since were in a tough time financially for the city, what would we be looking at to remove the improvements and then restore and then time frame . Without being able to dig into the contract, id say youre in the 100,000 or more range, depending on the extent whatever restoration is expected to be done. We cant put the same trees back where they were taken out, so wed be talking about redo doing concrete, curbs, and trying to put back trees where they were. It would be very costly. Okay. Thank you very much. Clerk okay. Thank you. So we will now hear from bureau of urban forestry, mr. Buck. Thank you. Good evening, commissioners, chris buck. Urban forestry, department of public works, department of urban forestry. I went overall the demands in the appeal. We communicated a lot with mr. Karnezes in december, when he said he would not be able to, more than likely, attend in person. We provided all of those materials at that time, and i think it was after, he realized hey, we had a presentation that we could have provided to him. We dont ever have the presentation that we give ready the day of or the day before. I talked to my supervisor saying hey, ive never provided our powerpoint to someone before. Moving forward, what can we do . She said yeah, we can provide it the day before or the day of the hearing, but that wasnt something we specifically do. We provided the information we had at the time that we had it, and there was no subsequent request for the actual powerpoint presentation. I mean, thats the whole point of our presentation, is to provide it at the hearing. But moving forward, if requested specifically, we will absolutely provide that maybe the day before or the day of the hearing, thats something we can provide. But we have a lot of communication back and forth with the appellant in december and january to make sure that zach had full access to that public hearing. And then, our hearing officer tried to make time for as much Public Comment as necessary provided by the appellant. Regarding item 4, his advice to pass on information he got from the hearing, we did pass on his request to our a. D. A. Consultant, but ultimately, what he stated was if thats not something evewere doing f other does, thats something were going to have to, as a decision, make. Are we going to be serving at Disability Advocates . For us, thats a slippery slope, and we did not pass along that information. What wed recommend, in the future, for Public Comment, if folks would like to try to comment here, if folks could put out the Public Information that way. This was all discussed at the previous hearing. I dont believe theres any new information thats been brought up in the request for rehearing. Thank you. Clerk thank you, mr. Buck. We are now moving onto Public Comment. Is there any Public Comment on this item . I see the phone number ending in 8570. Can you speak, please . You have two minutes. Thank you, miss rosenberg. This is casey asbury with the demonstration garden. Also, i want to etccho the commissioners thanks to you and your staff for your week. I am calling to comment on this item because i feel that the [inaudible] id urge the board to take another look at the penalty for this and bring it into alignment with article 16, which indicates that its 10,000 per tree as a penalty, instead of charging someone what would have been the in lieu fee if they had gotten permission to remove it. So in general, im commenting so that we can Work Together to improve the process. Im always grateful to the department of urban forestry, their willingness to improve on this. So thank you. Clerk thank you. We will now hear from mr. Klipp, general Public Comment. Im going to go without the video. Im actually sitting in a camper van. Clerk okay. You can make it entertaining for us. I just want to reflect caseys comment with the penalty here. Essentially, this is the equivalent of an in lieu fee, which is what you assess when a tree cannot be believed. The code goes into detail about what happens when a tree is illegally removed, and its not an in lieu fee. There are administrative penalties, even criminal penalties for that. I think you need to layout what was the fine for doing work without a permit. Im not sure why were talking about, you know, 2,000 in lieu fees for a contractor that illegally removed two trees. I understand that there was a discussion at the last hearing regarding ultimately who ends up paying for the work, and it absolutely should be the contractor who performs the work without the permit. Thank you. Clerk thank you. Is there any other comment public on this item . If so, press starnine if you called in. Starnine if you want to provide Public Comment on this item. Okay. I dont see any other Public Comment, so commissioners, this matter is submitted. Commissioners . May i start . As you know, in the initial hearing, i was extremely upset about how this whole thing involved. I thought the d. P. W. Manager in charge of the process was negligent or irresponsible or Something Else didnt do her job. I think i stated that last time to mr. Roytman during the period. At the same time, i feel some empathy or i feel some sympathy, sorry, for the for the ultimate for the person who cut down the trees. [please stand by] we have a case where the constituency of hayes valley is very upset because we on this board made a recommendation or a finding and that finding was not adhered to by ddw and this third case where trees were cut down without a permit and simply wasnt right. And so, were going whimp out and say, ok, well give you the benefit of the doubt, again, dpw, or do what the right thing is and penalize somebody for doing this wrong thing. I dont think we cant i am not in favor of doing the whole reconstruction and i dont think the trees can be replanted because of the spaces there. But i think the statement has to be made and i think the easiest statement is finding the vendor who did not adhere to the permit requirements to the city of San Francisco and cut down these trees and if dpw doesnt like it because were treating one of their vendors improperly, then maybe you should manage the vendors better. Ill jump in before Vice President honda does. This is not about the penalty but a showing request on the item and so, i think we need to stick to that matter and to determine whether theres sufficient grounds according to the standards for granting a hearing. And so, commissioner, may i ask a question. This is not an argument by a straightforward question. I think that this hearing was resolved when we said that when we did what we did. Probably the unresolved piece is that we werent clear on, obviously, the penalty phase of our finding. I think i said this in some of the prior hearings, but the board doesnt have authority to issue penalties under the public works code for the removal of the trees without a permit and so, it really is not an issue germane to the hearing request. Thank you. And then if that is the case, then i cant support a rehearing because i think we resolved the issue, but i still have a big chip on my shoulder related to this case and two other situations aforementioned. Thank you. I hope to clarify some of the issues that the department is having, but in this particular case, again, i believe that the grounds for rehearing are very strict and theres no merits that have been presented today that were not presented at the prior hearing. We have a motion from president lazarus on the basis theres no new evidence and on that motion role call . That motion carries and the reques40 andthe request is den. Item number 6, 20041, the department of building inspection and subject property is 2443 valego street, appearing on june 9, 2020 to Dwayne Carlson of a plumbing permit and work category 2pa to install a water closet and one shower at the existing locations and expired permit 200 8081470 and pp2081117511, remove and replace one water heater or permit 2016 and 0920657, remove and replace unexposed sewer main at the building exterior and expired permit numbers 20080813 and 0829980829982 and the permit e plumbing permit, 0609028. And we will hear from the appellant first. Im here tonight with a protest appeal. This is a sense of what im living with, a neighbor, Dwayne Carlsons unit, a recent photograph didn and you can see house is boarded up and external electric equipment from zone to zone. Tso starting with my request, im asking the barred to den the bor request this. This closes out multiple of the dbfi complaints and violations and i want to understand if preferential treatment was involved in the issuance to. I want the carlson to clean up the hazardous zone since 2006 and i want it done in a safe and efficient manner to follow city rules and regulations. Theres been ongoing construction in the carls sonss unit and there was a multi week delay where inspectors wouldnt given access to the unit. Drilling down into my specific issues, i think incremental to the points in my brief, the permit disruption does not match the rebuttal description of work and really, its just obvious to me, basically in the permit description where they have a small permit for fixtures only, bathroom remodel and lists five expired permits that havent been inspected or properly dealt wit