Meeting of the San Francisco board of appeals. President ann lazarus will be the presiding officer tonight joined by Vice President darryl honda, commissioner rick swig, Eduardo Santacana and commissioner tina chang. Welcome. Also present is deputy City Attorney who provide the board with any needed legal advice this evening. At the control is the legal clerk, and im Julie Rosenburg the executive director. We will also be joined by representatives from the city departments presenting before the board. The Board Meeting guidelines are as followed. The board requests you turn offer ooffall phones so they wit disrupt the proceedings. Appellants, permit holders and Department Respondents are giving 7 minutes to present and 3 minutes for rebuttal. People affiliated must include their comments within the 7 or 3 minute period. Member of the public are given 3 minutes each to address the board and no rebuttal. Time may be limited to two minutes if there are a large number of speakers and long agenda. Mr. Long way our legal clerk will give you a verbal warning 30 seconds before your time is up. If you have questions about requests a rehearing the board rules or hearing schedules email board staff to enabling Public Participation we have broadcast and streaming this live. To watch the hearing on tv go to sf gov tv cable channel 78. It will be rebroadcast from fridays at 4 00 p. M. On channel 26. A link to the live stream is found on the home page of our website at sf gov. Org boa. Public comment can be divided one you can join a zoom meeting by computer go to our website sfgov. Org boa and click on the zoom link or call 86699006833 and enter the webinar id8631766188. Sf gov tv is broadcasting this number in access across the bottom of your screen if youre watching at home. To block your number when calling in first dial star 67 then the phone number. I willsen for the Public Comment portion of your item to be called and dial star 9 which is equivalent of raising your hand so we know you want to speak. You will be brought into the hearing when it is your turn. And again our legal clerk will provide you with the verbal warning. Note there is a delay between the live proceedings and when it is broadcast and streamed on the tv and internet. Its very important people calling in reduce or turn off the volume on their tvs or computers otherwise there is interference with the meeting. If any participants or attendees need disability accommodation or Technical Assistance you can make a request in the chat function. Now we will swear in our firm all those who testify. Please note any member of the public may speak without taking an oath pursuant to rights under the sunshine orderrance. Raise your hand and say i do after sworn in or affirmed. [ swearing in ] thank you. If you are participant and not speaking please put your zoom speaker on mute. So item number one, is general Public Comment. This is an opportunity for anyone who would like to speak on a matter that is within the boards jurisdiction, but not on tonights calendar. And i do see we have someone hand is raised. Let me miss tang were going to put you onto the video one moment. Hello miss tang. I just want to make sure do we all sign up to speak at this time . Which item are you here for . There are a group of people for 838 grand avenue. So no right now this is just general Public Comment. Well call you when we get to that item and its Public Comment. So you dont need to sign up. Iany general Public Comment . Seeing none we will move onto item number 2. Commissioner comments an questions. So i would like to welcome officially our newest commissioner tina chang. We are delighted to have her join us. Im certain her background, her experience and her expertise will be a very valuable asset to the work that we do and we look forward to having you participate. So welcome and again, very glad to have you with us. Thank you very much. Its an honor and pleasure to be here. Any other commissioner comments and questions . I would like to add for the record as well, congratulations and welcome commissioner tina chang. And thank you president ye for bringing someone on as qualified as she is thank you. More of the same from myself thank you. Darryl says it all. Okay thank you. I would like to add to that other than to say welcome and were very very excited to have you. Thank you. Is there any Public Comment on this item . If so please raise your hand. I do not see any Public Comment so we are moving onto item number 3. Commissioners before you for discussion, the minutes of the december 9, 2020 meeting. Commissioners any changes, additions, delesions if not a motion to approve . A motion to approve please. On that motion, commissioner santacana. [ roll call ] thank you. Okay so that motionoczn carries. And the minutes are adopted. We are now moving onto item number 4po20 062. Steve valdez. Subject property is 57 niagara avenue. Appealing the issue august 31st 2020 to a alteration permit. 200337276 and 2018. Remove rear addition at first floor and construct new bedrooms, two new bathrooms family room and study. Existing kitchen and bathroom. Third floor remodel existing bedrooms and bathrooms new interior stair. This is 201810244042. We will hear from the appellant first mr. Valdez. Mr. Valdez . Alex do you see him . I dont see him. I see him he is raising his hand. One moment. Im moving him to a panelist. Hello mr. Valdez can you hear me . Hello can you hear me . Yes welcome. Okay. Thank you. Actually i would like to make a request at this time for a rescheduling or continuance. This is something that came up in the last two days about several pages of the plans that didnt show up in the package. Provided to the board. And the architect says that these items were too big and too difficult for him to send and thinks theyre not relevant. But i need time to double check that and see whether there is anything that might be relevant from my end of the appeal. So before you give your presentation youre making a request to continue this item. So we will have to have mr. Bill guam have an opportunity to respond. This is bill guam. The document is i emailed i told him of the email. Those title 24 those are the Energy Calculations they are not related to the design. So i think that hes excuse to reschedule is not reasonable to me. Okay. So commissioners before you we have mr. Sanchez is raising his hand. Thank you Scott Sanchez. The planning dont would not oppose a brief rescheduling of this. One of the issues that was raised. About a potential illegal unit that had been there in the past. I noticed we actually had no conducted the unauthorized dwelling unit screening for this project. Which staff has begun today, but has not been completed so the discussion of a possible continuance i was going to raise since it was raised now i thought i would make the board aware of that that we have not completed the unauthorized dwelling unit screening that is required for this permit scope. Im available for questions. Okay. Vice president honda has a question. Going through the brief, it was has been there a site visit to this property by the Planning Department. A site visit was done the issue of the illegal dwelling was never made to the Planning Department that was made to the Building Department. An exterior staff site visit was made, but not an interior site visit. I thought i saw mention of that in the brief we received. So you wouldnt mind having an extension at that point your department would do what . We would complete the unauthorized dwelling unit screening. You know there may be other issues. It may be beneficial to have some discussion about this item tonight and we can see if there are any other issues that the board would like to have investigated. But at least our position would be we need to complete the unauthorized dwelling unit screening which may not require a site visit. Thats generally review of city records to see if there is any evidence of this being used as a separate dwelling unit. And that has not been completed at this point unfortunately. Okay thank you. Commissioner swig. I also would raise the issue of site visit gibbon the history the muddied history of this building. And as presented in brief. Which would have led to probably the recommendation to resolve the issue later. So i wouldnt mind a continuance because i will request a visit from planning as well. So i guess the question is, do you want to hear anything because as scott just said its possible other issues will surface or do you just want to go ahead and continue it now and i guess rely largely on planning with building as well to bring back any issues at the time we hear this matter . I would say continue if the Planning Department feels it necessary to perform some more inspections or do some more paperwork. Well i understand that would probably be the ultimate decision tonight anyway. But the question was whether you want to hear anything or just simply defer the case in its entirety . How much time would you need mr. Sanchez . I mean generally just doing the unauthorized dwelling unit screening that only takes a couple days so i think we would be ready for the next hearing if the board would like us to do a site visit, then i guess i would want to know what the board would expect from the site visit when it is just to kind of confirm whether or not there has been an authorized dwelling unit or other issues raised in the appellants brief. Some of the issues raised in the appellant brief, about floor to ceiling height, the permit history that is also within the Building Permit section. I did note the issues were raised about what the original 1913 permit stated, but there is no doubt been work on the building since that time including i note that the building currently contains a garage. My assumption is that you know the building was raised to accommodate that garage. At some point and time. So if the board is really concerned about kind of the height measurement, the floor to ceiling measurements, then we can thats a bit more of a intensive investigation versus doing the unauthorized dwelling unit screening which would take a couple more days of researching this paperwork basically. We have almost a three week hiatus am i correct madam executive director . January 6th is our next hearing. Commissioner swig. Before we get into all of these details, who did what to whom and what is right and what is wrong, my recommendation would be proactive have dbi go out and assess and what might be right, what might be wrong. It would make this hearing go a lot smoother then we dont have to do what were going to do what were proposing tonight. We just stay here later. So lets be proactive and get all of the facts. Commissioner. Vice president honda. Let me take it off mute. Im similar although, i mean, were putting a lot of work on both the both departments. This property has a new owner and the novs were trying to be corrected three separate times prior. So there a lot of weeds here. And i think were going to get into it anyway so, im fine with a continuance. Unfortunately we have a three week hiatus as our madam president said or hearing the case tonight. Either or would be fine for me. Well, i think its a practical matter, one where the other is going to be continued. So i think the only caveat might be that we as i believe mr. Sanchez is requested, lay out some parameters of what it is we want looked at and reported back on before they go out and do a site visit. Am i is that correct mr. Sanchez . Are you looking for some direction in that regard . Reporter yes. Certainly, initially when i suggested the continuance that wouldnt have involved the site visit. So if the board would like a site visit knowing what the board would like us to look at would be helpful to ensure we dont need a second site visit or further continuance of the matter. I would make the motion for a continuance with a caveat that both planning and dbi make a side visit to verify and affirm that the claims with regard to the layout of the building, the ceiling height, just what is represented in the documents are affirmed and verified. So that we have a clear and truthful view of what were taking up when we take it up when the continuance is established. Commissioner santacana we havent heard from you. Yeah i raised my hand because im not sure that, i dont feel a need to mandate a site visit especially given the covid situation and certainly not two site visits. I think planning and dbi can determine what they believe is their Due Diligence on this case, but at the end of the day i would like us all to remember here the burden is on the appellant to have sufficient evidence to justify overturning of the decision of the Building Department. Thats really all we have to do. We dont need to do an investigation or supervise an investigation to go find more or less of something. So if mr. Sanchez thinks he needs to do a site visit to satisfy himself for his presentation in three weeks thats fine, but in my view if he thinks he can make a rigorous presentation without doing a site visit, you know the fewer people who are out there visiting peoples homes the better. Vice president honda. Again either or. I think that because there has been novs i think if the departments had been involved in resolving those novs to correct them, then a site visit is not essential as far as im concerned as well. Okay. I believe the motion specifies a site visit. Shall i adjust my motion with the intent of verifying the information of a site visit at the discretion of dbi and planning, but there is the intent to verify what is in the presentation are in fact the facts. We do need to ask if there is any Public Comment on this item. Is there any Public Comment . Okay and i also would like to clarify the appellant made a request for the continuance because there were some pages missing in the plans did you want to address that as part of your motion or no . Sure we might as well make it a catch all. Full set of plans to be supplied. Yeah. Okay. So we have a motion from commissioner swig to continue this matter to january 6th, 2021. So that the Planning Department can do an unauthorized dwelling unit screening and at dbi and the Planning Departments discretion they can do a site visit to verify the existing conditions at the property. As well as the matters being continued so that the permit holder can provide a complete and full set of plans to the appellant. On that motion [ roll call ] that motion carries. We are now moving on. Im sorry did we ask where both parties were available. We did not. But that is a good question. Kind of an important thing we showed bad manners by making the assumption. Well were going to be here thats important. Of course well be here, but i dont imagine people have plans, but we should ask. Youre absolutely right. I apologize. No i apologize. Mr. Guam and mr. Valdez are you available on january 6th . Yes i am. Yes i am. Wonderful see you january 6th. Thank you. Thank you. Okay so were now moving onto item number 5a and 5b. This is appeal number 20 074 and 20 075. Subject property is 2515 broadway. Appealing the issuance on october 8th, 2020 of a site permit. Add store two story rear edition, one bedroom, one bathroom, interior remodel, excavate a basement and first floor to add interior area. At a new elevator this is per m. I. T. Number 201706260318. And we will hear from mr. Sewage first. You have 7 minutes. Before we start i want to confirm mr. Duffy has access. I believe he said he logged on, but he is having issues. One moment. Okay. Hes okay just one moment. Inspector duffy i put you in the panelists can you hear me now . Loud and clear thank you. Welcome. Thank you. Thank you. Mr. Sewage you have 7 minutes. Yes thank you. President lazarus and fellow commissioners im jerry and my wife holly and i are appearing the permit on 2515 broadway. Adjacent neighbor on the west. If you could show that photograph. Our house 2513, was built in 1889. The hawk shields on the other side of 2515, 2517 was built the same year. The respondents in 1903. It was built as a Carriage House in the site of 2517. All are Historic Resources part of the Historic District in Pacific Heights. I assure you that we support families moving into our neighborhood and raising their children here as we did ourselves e. , but we are concerned in this instance because the respondent has minimized the scope of the project. We have hadr had repeatedly hado ask for sufficient information so we could understand the design of the plans in that regard weve had to obtain first an attorney then a Structural Engineer and now architect. We found on the plans as filed the windows on the west side of the house were mislocated or left off altogether making it impossible for us to understand our window locations opposed to their new windows. They then obtained a professional that could identify the windows properly. In march of 2008 we met with the respondent and his architect with u our Structural Engineer. It was his belief that he indicated a likely demolition under section 317b2a of the planning code. It was his recommendation we should ask for a stand alone demolition plan signed by a licensed structural h structurad architect. A question for the demolition calculations were ignored until suddenly two days before the dr hearing in september 2018 we were provided with them. However these calculations dealt with only two of the three required 317 demolition calculations. Not 317b2a. It is this section which we believe applies to the situation where an internal remodel is so extreme the piece meal alterations and the effective demolition of the house with concerns such a approach to reconstruction brings. The architect for 2515 that the first of three statutory tests has been met in the grounds that the Building Department never requested building demolition calculations. Therefore he says it is reasonable to assume the Building Department did not find any cause to reevaluate the proposed scope of work as a demolition. That would seem to be a remarkable Statement Given neither building nor planning has been given democrat demolitn calculations. 2515 broadway is a known Historical Resource as identified by staff in the categorical examination of term nation. Indeed in the Pacific Heights Residence Association to the Planning Commission of septembea asked for the development of the remodeling plan that would result in less demolition and reconstruction of a historic house. Our architect has recent experience with a known Historical Resource house and the Planning Departments requirements for demolition calculations. In regard to the issue regarding the respondents prosecutents prw number one and window number 2. Alealec could you put up the second exhibit . Want to stop his time while youre doing that please alec. Here we go. Thats the view from inside our house to the west. 2515 was built in 1903 it never had any windows on that side. This is the main window it is over seven feet long, 5 and a half feet high. Right in the core of the main floor. People come into the house through there back and forth between the living room, kitchen, its the main area. What we would ask if we look at the next one alec, that you can see there is just immediately to the kind of 5 00 from window number 1 which is their proposed double sided windows one of those windows was removed at design review. We still have a situation where they will extend into our area and we would ask that window and window number 2 which looks into our master bedroom both have opaque glass in all of the panes. That seems to us a reasonable solution it allows them to keep the windows in place. It allows them to have light flowing into the interior, but preserves our privacy. Now i would like to have mike speak. Very good. Thank you. Im the preservation architect in San Francisco. I have some comments about the demolition calculations. As the plans are hard to read being the dash lines that show the demolished walls are obscured by shading so they can be easily overlooked almost all of the interior walls are being removed leaving floors unsupported, possibly prone to demolition during construction. The demo counts themselves should have been completed per an sf planning code implementation document dated february of 2014 had been revised and 2020 should still apply. That document part 4 step 5 of the document lists four tests to be used for Historic Resources. Mike can put that up can we have alex put that up. Yes that would be great. Thank you. This project exceeding the fourth test for demolition. Removal of more than 75 of the existing internal structural framework or floor plates. Can you see it right side midpage this specific. 4. So, the removal of interior walls translated to a demolition by that definition. And due to inconsistent wall designations and know madesignat 3 which has to do with 25 of external walls being removed. So that closes my comments. 30 seconds. Im finished now. Okay thank you. I believe your time is up and youll have time in rebuttal. Thank you. We will now hear from the next appellant. Mrs. Fox child. Good evening. Good evening welcome. My name is. You have 7 minutes thank you sorry for interrupting. My name is francis i live at 2517 broadway up hill from the respondent. First i wanted to apologize that i was not aware i should have submitted a full brief. I hope i can adequately present my concerns in my 7 minutes. Unfortunately, since the inception the project sponsor continues to ignore our concerns about the excavation and construction to this project. I am perplexed. I lost audio. Audio is out. I paused time. It was only after i hired attorneys that they responded to my concerns. However i found that a great expense the attorneys focused way too much time on smaller issues, like the placement of the elevator drainage which im sure we can work out and not my primary concern, which is that the project be built safely. As a result, im here before you today on my own. We are fine with the proposed of the house im more wanting to ensure the Structural Integrity of my home. Once i was no longer relying on legal it is reasonable to ask for more detail how to construct their plan and request accuracy in the amount of demolition to be done in order to avoid Foundation Damage to neighboring homes. Having lived on the block for many years i know my neighbors have encountered unforeseen complications in all recent projects. Up the street, across the street and the bottom of the hill. I trust you have had a chance to read tom norses letter. Alec can you put up exhibit a please. Garage expansion turned into a lot more than he expected. Flush flush im sorry i could not be here for this Public Comment. He specifically talks about the issues related to lack of structural footing. My home was built in 1883 and 2515 broadway was built by the same family in 1903 as a Carriage House for one of their daughters. These historical homes sit side by side and it is entirely unknown what the foundations will show. The project sponsor has not done or showed any reports or studies. It may not be clear from the plans which i found similarly confusing, but this project proposes to excavate two stories below our kitchen, in order to construct their lower level. As part of my research, i had similar constructions with a Structural Engineer, architect as well as toms project manager. They were all surprised how without consulting a Structural Engineer, the project sponsor could represent that a two story edition with two additional stories below grade, installation of a elevator,ing the steep slope of the street, sand beneath the surface soil could be supported with minimal excavation under a 100yearold Carriage House with unknown foundation and soil condition. I do not believe they provided Accurate Information about the amount of soil needs to be excavated or the walls that will need to be demolished all of which put my home at risk. Given the steep slope it seems likely there will be much more excavation than stated on the environmental application and it should have had a technical report. It is clearly not a simple addition of a bedroom. And the minimal description that they have indicated. Based on the drawing and confusing details about allowable, habitual, existing square footages it is also very possible demo calculations are not correct. From the plans no internal walls remain, the entire roof is to beerberemoved, as well as the il scare case and front and side remaining. I hope you understand why im so concerned. I live with my elderly mother and daughter and could not afford to purchase this home today and most certainly cannot afford to collect any impact. Its also not fair every step of the process at my expense i must ensure my home will not be damaged by their development project. Thus far i have not received any details to demonstrate any protection of my foundation. I continue to hope we can work with them to ensure mutually agreeable situation. I would welcome visits from any professionals who would enable the project to be built safely. To date they have not demonstrated any willingness to comply with civil codes intended to ensure foundation stability. They continue to assure they are not within planning purview and environmental reports and technical reports are not necessary, promising to take care of everything later. I would like to request this commission help ensure this not become like 655 alhave a rado initially permitted to a Single Family home and ended up severely undermining. Resulting in demolition. In preparing for today i looked for similar situations in our neighborhood came across an appeal for permit on 2467 pacific that came before you last may. For that project, also involving historical home they proactively addressed concerns like mine. They conducted a study that studies the soil and recommendations for temporary excavation. To summarize alex can you put up b please. To summarize, i respectfully request that the commission either deny this permit father r further review or have the following applications, engage a licensed engineer. A licensed environmental engineer, measurement of soil excavation and geotechnical study. Utilize this information, provide Accurate Information about the amount of soil excavation and removal of walls. Require them to play for grout and underpinning during excavation. Require proper support for their retaining wall. Temporary insurance to prevent and ensure the project complies with all city and civil Building Codes. Thank you for your consideration, i appreciate your time. Thank you we have a question from Vice President honda. Yes, the question is, is regarding the outreach from the neighbors. What have you attempted, what have they attempted . I mean has there been open conversation with them or only with representatives . You know, i have been trying for the get go to have them engage a Structural Engineer and do these analysis. You can see from their communication they keep saying they will do it and that it is it not appropriate or relevant to do it at this stage of the process. Since my understanding is once the permit is approved theres a limited ability to try and resolve and get some of these things accomplished after the permit i think its important and have been told its important that it be done ahead of time. Some of these calculations relevant to the demo, the amount of excavation. So, i have met with them, we have had quite amicable conversations they are just unwilling to do any of these calculations et cetera, and engage these people. They havent looked at our foundations nothing. Okay thank you. Okay we have a question from commissioner swig. I have a question for the appellant, but i have a question for [indiscernible]. Would you keep that exhibit b available for me for questions about the planning please . Which exhibit sir . The appendix b that you just had up. Just a list of requested items. Did you want to ask planning the questions now or do you want to hear from the permit holder first . I want to hear from the permit holder, but its a very good i have this ready for you when youre ready sir. Yeah thanks. I appreciate it. Thank you. So were now moving onto the permit holder. Since youre responding to two appeals you have 14 minutes. Welcome. Thank you. President , Vice President , commissioners city planners. Thanks for your time. Being providing a personal brief on the martyr. Given the time constraint we like our project manager and architect working on this to provide the project scope, the process he followed, approvals he obtained as well as address hopefully your concerns about the neighbors. And then as a homeowner would like to make additional comments, but with that said i would like to give that ample time for just to go through the entire project including number of we have and outreach just mentioned. With that i would like just please that you dont mine to use the rest of my time if there is enough time i get back at it. Thank you. Thank you. I like to do a screen share of a power point presentation. Forgive me. Can we pause the time while he gets his presentation ready please . Good evening im the architect. I have known the owners for a number of years and had the opportunity to work with them on a small remodel the a their previous home. They are both hardworking professionals and parents who value their family time with their young son and daughter. Their children attend local schools and both are very active with the community. They will make a welcome addition to this neighborhood. The home were discussing this evening is existing two bedroom, four bathroom home. One bedroom on the third floor, one bedroom on the first floor, two bathrooms on a third floor, one bathroom on the second floor, and one bathroom on the first floor. The home was remodeled in the early 90s by the previous owner who were empty nesters and the layout was designed to fit their situation. A modest rear yard two story addition and new layout to provide for a young family of four and potentially elder families and intergenerational home. As part of the remodel weve been permitted to provide new windows to have Natural Light and ventilation into the interiors of the rooms. The site permit was submitted for review june 26, 2017 the final review september of 2018. During the project review the project was reviewed by the San Francisco planning Staff Members, now retired, christopher may and in addition to senior Staff Members from the preservation team, the residential design team, and San Franciscos Building Department review staff. The appellants filed for discussionary review and a Planning Commission conducted a hearing on the project septembe. The Planning Commission voted unanimously to approve the project as presented with the exception of one modification, to remove a second floor window on the east elevation. In a design for the home we were sensitive to how far the new rear yard addition should extend. We not only sought to preserve a wonderful backyard for the family which you can see presented here, but also sensitive to how the new addition would fit within the neighborhood to the block pattern and adjacent neighbors. What you see here is the subject property 2515 broadway and in blue weve represented the extent of the two story rear yard addition. With these considerations in mind we designed a new addition over 12 feet short of the allowable rear yard set back line. In this diagram you can see the proposed site plan on the left, the existing site plan on the right. The red line indicates the extent of the rear facade of the existing building, on the left here the blue represents the proposed addition footprint and this line represents the rear yard set back. Which is approximately 12 feet 2 and 7 8 from the rear yard addition. This is a model that was shared with the adjacent neighbors prior to the Planning Commission hearing showing a 3foot reduction which we decided to provide as a revision as an act of good faith to the neighbors. The appellant has also made reference to the proposed windows along the east side of the home. I want to make one reference here that this model represents what was submitted and approved by the city. In reference to the windows along the east side of our home, the distance of the side wall from the Property Line allows us the opportunity to provide new windows along the east elevation which receives a considerable 5789 of light given the separation of the home and the adjacent home at 2513 which you can see from this photograph. For the site permit approval weve been permitted eight new windows which will allow Natural Light and ventilation into the inteainterior spaces this is a reduction from the initial permit which had 13 windows. Through the discussions with the appellant at 2513 and redesign considering the appellants concerns we removed four of the windows. During the Planning Commission meeting the commission removed one more additional window at the dining room to bring the approved total to eight windows. In the appellants suggested the two sets of windows here will infringe on his privacy. The separation of the two homes is over six feet with a six foot tall fence in between. The lower windows included in the appellants request are to the dining room. This was changed from 3 to 2. The proposed upper window windol have prominent view of the appellants roof taken from the existing third floor windows. During the course of our review process we provided the Planning Department staff with a demolition calculation sheet, which provided graphics and tables demonstrating the amount of demolition that would occur. On the creation of the demolition calculation sf planning coat 317 was referenced and used to measure the amount of demolition. The appellant has made reference to part a which specifically states that the Building Department has the ability to determine that an application for demolition is required. It does not require that we should provide additional calculations from those called for in sections b and c. These next slides provide the calculations that were provided which show the demolition scope is well below the threshold outlined in section b as you can see here. Where section b says demolition occurs on more than 50 of the fa said and the removal of more than 65 of exterior walls. Below 50 , here exterior walls are 24 . Well below 65. This is section c, of the section 317. You can see here, removal is 50 of the vertical envelope levels and 50 of the existing building. 23. 1 . Again, well below. The appellant also makes reference to the sf Building Code 103a violations. Its my interpretation that section 103a is provided as an enforcement tool for the Building Department when construction related activities have resulted in the near or complete demolition of a building. And has exceeded its permitted scope of work, or has been conducted without the proper permit. Since our permit has not had any construction related activities it would seem this code section is not applicable to the argument that we are exceeding the demolition stated in the permit set. Mr. Duffy can hopefully speak more about this section and how it will be used and can be used by the department. I would like to speak to the appeal provided by ms. House child about the scope of work will have on her home. We are sympathetic to her concerns and if the roles were reversed we would be raising the same questions. We have been in communication with her throughout the design and have agreed to provide her with instructional Engineering Design and the geotech report per her request. These professionals were not part of our design team before the site permit was issued because we wanted to wait to have a clear understanding of what would be allowed by the Planning Department before we engaged them. Now that weve obtained the site permit we have contracted with semco engineering to provide the Structural Design and testing reports. We have also offered to her to provide serving and monitoring of both homes before, during and after the foundation to monitor if any movement has occurred on either home. We feel our communication has been open and neighborly and we look forward to continuing our discussions to relieve her concerns. I would like to provide this last side to illustrate the open communication we and the neighbors have had since the beginning of this process. In total there are approximately 115 emails exchanged between the owner, myself and the neighbors to discuss and respond to questions and concerns. At this time i would like to turn my time back over to the owners for any closing statements. Thank you. Thank you jeff. Thank you again. Few minutes left. I think personal belief and weve been at this project about three years now and what we believe is that this project is important to us obviously for our family reasons, accommodations. What is more important for us is that we follow to the best of our knowledge every recommendation. [indiscernible] so i think that what has happened we are left to engage in dialogs continue with that. We are neighbors as we said. I think we have conversation with francis in terms of putting a Monitoring System on the foundation in terms of Movement Things of that nature. Why not we will willing to do those things. And we hope to do those two dialogs. Im hoping we repair our relationship with the neighbors and one day we can actually invite them to the new home with our kids and be acting as neighbors again as more of a personal comments here as jeff has presented all the technical and operational by the professional that has been presented in this case. So with that, again i thank you and whatever time is left i will give back to you. Thank you. A question from Vice President honda. Yes. I guess this would be representative of the party. Thank you for the thorough explanation and going through that. Who is the local contractor that is to perform the work or the project manager correct . I think youre addressing the question to me . Yes. Correct. Okay. Im the architect. We have not engaged with a contractor at this point. Once we have the site permit, once we put together the Structural Engineering, then we will be able to put the project out for bid and start to communicate with contractors and discuss the project more thoroughly with them. Okay and then second quick question is that you hired a soil engineer at this point so if the board were to let your project go forward and deny the appeal would you mind that there are monitors on the monitors on the foundation survey monitors on the foundation as part of that . Yes. Weed weewed be more than willig towards that and we have offered that to the neighbors we have received proposals for that work. Thank you very much. You have a question from commissioner swig. Alec i think im ready for that appendix b now. So, so this came as a request as you heard, from the appellant. Being the project manager, would this list be acceptable for you if we had attached it to any approval tonight . Yes. Thank you. Yes. The only one im not clear on is the second one engage a license environmental engineer to perform a thorough environmental analysis. I would like some clarity on that. The first one to engage the Structural Engineer of course. The second one, to utilize information provide Accurate Information about the amount of soil excavation and removingal of walls of course. You know i feel that weve done that to this point. But we will continue if that scope changes. We would take on the cost if there is any cost having to grout the soil for stability and if there was any underpinning of the Neighbors Foundation during excavation. Of course were going to provide proper support for any retaining walls or any foundations. Temporary shoring of course. And then ensuring project compliance absolutely. The only one i would ask for clarification on is the second one. Okay when we get into the rebuttal i will ask the appellant to clarify that item for you. Thank you. Okay we have president lazarus a question. Yes i just want to say that before we get too far down the path i will be interested in hearing what inspector duffy has to say. I think that will help clarify what if anything may need to be specified with the permit. Okay. Thank you. So we are now moving onto the Planning Department presentation. Mr. Sanchez. Thank you. Scott sanchez Planning Department. Would like to just start by adding my congratulations to commissioner chang and welcome to the board of appeals look forward to working with you again and your new capacity its always beneficial to have plans experience on the board. Speaking perhaps selfishly on that and i hope you dont jump to the Planning Commission. I dont know why so many board of appeals members are going there the hours are terrible, but you know, welcome. I think youre really going to enjoy the board of appeals. Are you just saying that because you were her previous boss . I did not directly supervise mischang in her previous work at the Planning Department, but i did have the pleasure of working with her on many items. But now i can move onto my presentation on this case. Subject property at 2515 broadway is located within rh1 zoning district. What is before you is a Building Permit. The application was submitted in june of 2017. Between february and march of 2018, the notification was performed and two discretionary view requests were filed by the adjacent neighbors the appellants in this case. The discretionary view hearing took place in september of 2018. At that time the Planning Commission took discretionary view to remove one window to address privacy concerns raised by one of the appellants. Whether or not this institutes a demolition under a section 317. This does not by any stretch institutconstitute a demolition. There are two primary calculations which i think have been discussed extendsively in previous hearings of the board of appeals. It doesnt even come close to meeting either of those calculations. There is a third trigger which is whether it is a demolition under the Department Building of inspection in which case this is on a completely different Application Form. There is a separate Application Form that is required for demolitions. This is an alteration permit its not a demolition. Dbi did review this and did not find that this was inappropriately applied for as an alteration. This is an alteration permit it is not a demolition that the department of building inspection has addressed that, but i would defer to acting deputy chief duffy about that matter. There is subconsequent comments raised about the 75 internal calculations threshold. That is not a calculation under section 317 for what institutes as a demolition. That is under section 1005 of the planning code and applies only to the landmark buildings. While this is a Historic Building and a known Historic Resource it is not a landmark building it is not subject to the demolition calculations in section 1005. Between the two buildings. The Planning Commission found it was generally appropriate with the removal of the one window. Unfortunately, we didnt get a brief from the second appellant. The issues would be better addressed by the department of building inspection. I am available for any questions. Thank you. Thank you, mr. Sanchez. I do not see any questions at this point. We will move on to department of building inspection. Inspector duffy, you have 14 minutes. Welcome. Good evening, joe duffy. I would like to welcome our new commissioner chang. I look forward to working with you. I am sure you will enjoy the experience of the board of appeals. If you need any d. B. I. Information about the process, please reach out to me. The voting permit under appeal here i dont think i need that here. We have heard that. On the architects comments were very thorough. 100 accurate. What we want to hear and see on plans regarding any of the processes that were followed. The fact that he spoke about the permit process you cannot bring in the techs until you know what you are going to get otherwise it is wasting money and time. That they are at this point, getting the Team Together now and dealing with the concerns that the neighbor and every neighbor would generally be concerned about. That was part of the agenda package which includes the items we have heard already. They are relevant. The monitoring is a welcome addition. It is not part of the voting. It is recommended on projects like this they monitor to evaluate any potential move in the buildings. I did hear talk about underpinning grouting, and the good stuff you like to hear. On the demolition in the Building Code, this project wouldnt bring up 103 in the Building Code on this. It never would because unless they went and demolished the building, it is really not going to be relevant here. The Planning Department has their restrictions on the interior demolition, o on the exterior. In this case it is 100 alteration project. Unless they are offtrack you are never going to bring in the 103 on the demolition. It would not be a factor in this. On the site permission was given by d. B. I. That has been sent out. We did that. I dont see anywhere where it hasnt been routed properly. With that i am available for any questions. Do yodo you have a question, commissioner swig . Thank you. Once again could you bring up appendix d, please. Thank you very much. Happy holidays. Looking at this list which was presented, is this a thorough listing, and would this be adequate if we attached it to the potential motion this evening . Do you have any thoughts on the subject . Thank you, commissioner swig. I agreed with the comments of the architect on the items. I was shaking my head when he brought up item 2. I dont know what that is there for. To put someone through that environmental engineer measurement of soil and the technical study and enviro environmental is covered. There is going to be d. B. I. Are going to have a special inspection. I dont think it is relevant. The other thing that i dont know if they want to get into that is under pinning during excavation. They would do that and that is the right thing to do. I think that is more of a civil issue. I dont think i have seen that put on conditions of a permit. Who is going to pay for what . Other than that Everything Else speaks for itself. Thank you. How would you suggest thank you for the comments. They are helpful. How would you suggest we handle we have been through this before and rightfully so concerns from neighbors. How would you deal with the grout and under pinning issue . Good question. That is normally done by an underpinning and grading agreement between neighbors. I am not sure from looking at the plans there is going to be much underpinning issues or grading issues. The architect may answer that better. The plans i review i couldnt really tell. Certainly from dba point of view and board as well. The more agreements beforehand it is better to get that written up between the neighbors. If we do under pinning we will pay for the repairs required to your property. That can be exploited. I think we have had a couple cases where the contractor does the work on the project and then come in and say it is 150,000. We had one like that last year. We dont get into that. It does bring up sometimes some difficulty, i find, in my experience. Underpinning agreement is good in itself. Would you suggest being pro active in this discussion and anticipating further discussion rather than mandate . Would you suggest something we might bring forward later . Not saying that we will. Rather than mandating the underpinning agreement that we suggest to vote the underpinning agreement might be reviewed or should we suggest it might be considered . Yes, you might want to consider something. Any underpinning or grading issues shall be addressed prior to excavation before major excavation. Before they start. They are not causing. If the neighbors are concerned about damage to the property, any contractor with Due Diligence might dig a test hole to find the bottom of the Neighbors Foundation how deep they are going. If they are going below that they need to have that discussion. We are to go down 6 feet. Your building starts 4 feet. This is what we are going to do and how we will ham it. We are paying for the underpinning. We could easily do it when we do the work on the foundation. That is the scenario. How you want to put that in. That under pinning should be addressed prior to any major excavation of the site. Thank you for that information and suggestion, mr. Duffy. I am done. Thank you. President lazarus has a question . I focused in on what inspector duffy raised about requiring a party to pay for something that is not directly related to the permit. I would like to ask deputy City Attorney to perhaps comment on that, whether it would be within our mandate to require one party to a case to pay for something. Good evening, commissioners, City Attorneys office. That would be a civil matter as chief inspector duffy also raised. There is no way for d. B. I. To enforce or determine the reasonable cost of that. We dont ever you cant recall a case where the board has required another party to pay for the work on another property. Thank you. Just wanted to clarify. If thank you. We are now moving on to Public Comment. Is there anyone here who would like to provide Public Comment on this item . Please raise your hand. I dont see anybodys hand raised. We will move to rebuttal. You have three minutes. We cant hear you. Sorry. I will turn it over in a moment. I want to say in relation to the windows, a large number of windows in the original plans. The ones we are concerned about are two over the master bath and double pair over the main core area. I reiterate with the master bath to have those windows in opaque glass to give them the light. They have indicated they dont have a view. I presume they would be happy with the light. Michael, did you want to comment . Just a couple quick issues. In 317a the unlawful demolition is how the Building Department designed the demolition removal of principal portion. In this case construction which alters twothirds or more of the interior elements. When you remove the interior walls you are a long ways toward removing the partitions. I am not sure how far away from the demolition as declined. Not in a lawful demolition. Secondly, in the planning code implementation document it states article 10 structures but it also says requires that any ceqa is required to go to step five for those calculations. I had a project in the last couple years that mandated that. It was because of the nature. This building is listed resource as part of a survey. It is as far as i can tell this implementation document absolutely connects to this project and should be calculations should be done accordingly. Those are the comments regarding the things that i have. Okay. Thank you. If you are finished, then we will hear from ms. Hochschild. You have three minutes. Can you put the document i. E. Maile, theemailed on the scree . Let me apologize. I am like everybody on this call, this is a new one for me. I am learning a lot. I looked at the specific property. That is where i got the great language, the stuff they had volunteered to do. They volunteered preemptively to pay and things of that nature. What this document is and what the request is i dont have the document. You just emailed it to me. I it is not prepared. I will tell you anyway. Are we going to begin or do you want to wait for the document . No, that is okay. I can talk about it. What they said is they had a soil engineer bored a number of holes to ensure pressure grouting and combination to successfully shore the building. The title of the exhibit is the geotechnical investigation prepared by rohach engineers. They did all sorts of stuff. You know that looks good to me to make sure again. They reviewed geologic stuff and did criteria and made sure again that it was okay to do. You know, it is basically a soil report written up. Then let me address another comment. There is absolutely no question in my mind, and you can ask jeff that this is going to go below our foundation. It is a steep hill. Just the way the lots are done. There is no question that it will go below our foundation. They are building in the back where we dont even have a house. The whole four feet, six feet. That is why the plans. It is very difficult. Jerry had a picture from their garage all the way back it is way below our kitchen. You know, that is why i am so concerned and, hence, the list that is there. Also, it is expensive to draw up all of these agreements. These lawyers were a disaster. That is why i have some of that in there is that, you know, i dont want to have to hire lawyers and hundreds of dollar cents an hour to make sure some of these things and agreements that seems to be volunteered are in there. That was it. That is all i have unless anybody has anything else. Do you have a question from commissioner swig . Can you put that list up again, please. I just would like to go down the list. The bullet point . I am sorry. This number two came from other peoples language. Can you put it in clear english . What do you want be to achieve with item number 2, please . It seems to me a soil report and understanding what they are dealing with under our house should be part of it because it is going so far under our house. We are talking 8 feet, 10 feet. Who knows . At the back of the house and we dont have a crawl space under there. Iit is a steep slope. This is all of your world. It just they are going way down under our house, and it is worrying. I dont think because, you know, for all we know they could share walls. We have no clue what is going on. As i understand it, this piece figures that out ahead of time. The soils engineer or engineer study to ensure that your is it that your foundation will not be under mined . Yes, and i think the way i read it and i looked in another one which i cant remember they separated out the two things and talked about a soil study and the engineer study is different. I will talk to him about that to make you feel comfortable. I will ask him. I think that. Let him address that issue to make you feel comfortable that your foundation is being recognized and that the soils that might under mine your foundation are being recognized for this study. Does that may being you feel comfortable . Yes. My concern is i dont want to be sitting before you or whatever needing to think through what i need to do legally to have this happen. I think that i dont want to just sort of trust. I think i get comfort in the way specifically it was written into the permit. Lets see how mr. Read responds to your need for comfort. Thank you. Thank you. Mr. Ead, you have three minutes. I am sorry six minutes two appeals. I would like to directly respond to the comments. As i stated before, we certainly want to make sure that we are addressing any concerns that we have. Like i said, if the situations were flipflopped, we would have the same questions. We have brought the engineers on boards, the soil tex no logical engineers. They have Soil Technology engineers with simcoe engineering using that geotech report to start the Foundation Design and overall structural system. Those are the types of information that we have offered to make available, and happy to sit down with ms. Hochs child and the engineer and review together. If you dont see this every day, it might seem greek. I am more than happy to do that sort of discussion with her. Okay. You still have time. That is all the comments i have unless he would like to address anything else. Thank you. I appreciate the concerns here. The only thing here that was mentioned very well. It is difficult to know the cost of something ahead of time. I am uncomfortable that says pay when we dont know what it is we are signing up to related to that exhibit. That may beings sense. Structural engineering, shoring, monitoring. All of those are subject and unclear what we are trying to do. With that one exception i want to say i support that exhibit. I am on the 2515. I would like to add a few comments around privacy. We have been pretty open with our initial conversations, jeff has been trying very hard to bring this between neighbors before bringing it to the stage. We have removedded a lot of windows. We do understand we live in the city of San Francisco and living in a city requires some compromises. We think that we have made a lot of compromises on the windows. You know, at this point we really would love to be able to use the distance between the two houses, as jeff mentioned earlier, to get more light in the house and hopefully be able to move on and start the project. Thank you. The thank you. We have a question from commissioner swig. I just am trying to get this out of the way. It seems we have one window in question and it is not removing. It would be put in opaque covering so privacy would be maintained. What is your thought on that one window and putting making it so there is a protection between yourselves and your neighbor . I have an exhibit that you could share. We have compromised many windows already, and every time, you know, we compromise one thing, there is another ask out there. I just want to ask about that window. That window is going to be in the plans a bedroom window. Basically upstairs. Also, a bedroom window we want to ensure privacy. There will be window treatments, curtains, drapes, that sort of thing on the interior side of the window. We also value privacy of our space. I understand. I just wanted to ask the question. That is the only real item brought up by one of the appellants. I will move on. Thank you. We will now hear from the Planning Department. Mr. Sanchez, six minutes. Thank you. Not much to add. It is demolition under 317 as alleged by the appellant in this case. Maybe i understand now the argument to ceqa. That determination was made three years ago. First approval with the Planning Commission decision two years ago. That window for that termmination has lapse. I didnt see anything to lead me to belief that was improperly made. I am available for questions the world may have. Okay. Thank you. We will hear from the department of building inspections. Inspector duffy. You have six minutes. Just real briefly. The comments from the appellants architect on the demolition of twothirds interior that is a demolition without permit code section. We are not talking about demolition without permit. That is not relevant for this project. The other appellant. I hear the concerns, but not understanding and being concerned about the building is definitely something we can help with at d. B. I. There is a start of work before any demolition or excavation they will be required to get an inspection from the building inspector. If there was any concerns at all before the project starts or at excavation stage, reach out by us by phone or email. We welcome the concerns now and that starting. We would address them. These issues sorted out ahead of time. The contract will tell you right away if you are getting underpinning, you should not the monitoring there wont be movement. You are getting the existing foundation and stronger foundation. That will be a good thing. It sounds like they brought their team on board. I am very aware of how to spend money on your property for someone working next door. Use city resources if you need to hire a private engineer or lawyer, that is fine there. Are resources in our department to help you along the way. Thank you. Commissioners this matter is submitted. I am going in the direction of approving the appeal and moving forward on the permit with conditions related to that with if you would put it up again. My memory isnt good enough. What i would do is find for the appellant and approve the permit on the condition of engaging a licensed Structural Engineer, etc. , and utilizing the information to provide Accurate Information about the amount of soil excavation and require proper support, provide for temporary shoring to prevent settlement damage and the foundation and excavation with the recommendation that the two parties enter into an agreement related to potential underpinnings during excavation. That is the direction i am going. I would love to hear comments from my fellow commissioners. Vice president honda. Similar but i dont think that we should determine the construction practices of the permit holder. I do believe that it is just smart to condition the permit that there be surevay monitors survey monitors on site and the project sponsors have contracted a licensed engineer and soil geotech person to put that toeing. I think some to put that together. They are on the list from the second appellant are mandated by the city and county. It is redone daptto have them. It is going to be subject to the approved permits. We know that is the case. I am flexible to your motion. I would, you know, if it was me i would grant the appeal and condition it that survey monitoring to be placed on both appellants as well as project sponsors. Of course, that would be at the cost of the project sponsor. If it requires underpinning or grouting that is determined after. The recommendation to have them discuss that agreement, i think we can make the recommendation. I dont think we should condition the permit on it. I would like to add the last bullet point to me feels like we are considering them to be guilty before proven innocent. The assumption is that you are going to comply with the Building Codes. I object to including that one. If you dont mind, commissioner swig do you mind if i make that motion . You do a better job. Our tv does a wonderful job of translating our gibberish. I will try. You want me to make it . No, the motion could be that we would grant the appeal and condition the permit that a survey monitoring, foundations of both appellants take place at no cost to them, of course, and just a recommendation that they would, you know, talk about the underpinning and the grouting but we are not going to condition upon that. What about the bullet points in exhibit p . I believe the discussion was remove . That is one condition regarding the monitoring should be sufficient. It is redundant on the other ones. Okay. I am comfortable with commissioner hondas point of view. You will make it right. I am trying to show the new commissioner chang how well we get along together. She is wondering why did she commit to this job, that is why she is wondering . I would like to ask inspector duffy what do you recommend, Vice President honda, when it should start, how long it should last . Joe duffy here. I think we spoke on this before in one other hearing. I dont have a comfort level. I am doing this. It is typical and monitoring from the company that does it. It is a licensed company. Asking every month or quarter or year before or after. It is not something i certainly dont feel comfortable doing it. Typical monitoring for construction project. The Monitoring Company will do that. I know that it is obviously before they Start Construction and then for a little while afterwards, as far as i know. I think we get into too much detail on the last one. I felt like that after the hearing. General practices construction monitoring if that is what you want to use. Madam director, all monitoring data to be shared at request to both appellants. Okay. On what basis is this motion made . Help me out with that one. On the basis to help ensure that the foundation isnt under mined of the Neighboring Properties . I wouldnt say that. Inspector duffy. The purpose of survey monitoring to ensure there is no movement . To ensure stability and monitor any potential movement of any ad add adjacent properti. Thank you. So we have. It takes a village. Exactly. We have a motion from Vice President honda to grant the appeal and issue the permit that they require the permit holder engage a survey monitor at his cost for both appellants to ensure that the stability and to monitor the movement of the adjacent properties and further that this data must be shared with the appellants and this monitoring will be done as per general practice for the industry. I didnt do that very well. I will word it correctly in the minutes. I apologize. On that motion, commissioner santacana. I thought it was beautiful. I vote aye. President lazarus. Aye. Commissioner chung. Aye. Commissioner swig. Aye. Okay. That motion carries 50. You have to raise that voice on the aye pretty soon. It will come naturally. We will take a break until quarter of or 10 minutes of . I would say until 6 45. Thank you very much. Thank you. Thank you for your patience. We will resume at 6 45 p. M. Thank the december 15th meeting of San Francisco board of appeals. Item 6, appeal 19123. 83 will grant avenue. Appealing issuance on october 29, 2019 to nonconforming restaurant use of the subject property has not been abandoned. Based on the fact the permit submitted within the three year period to renovate the space. Additional permits for additional work for the restaurant use. All permits still active and authorized work and associated inspections begun. This is record 2019014303. January 29. 2020 upon motion by commissioner santacana, board voted 401 to continue to february 19, 2020 for new attorney and briefs. With further direction no permits associated with the subject property could be delayed because of the continuance. February 19, 2020 Board Meeting canceled. The matter rescheduled to march 11. On on a motion the board voted 41 to continue this matter to april 1, 2020 so that the Property Owner could provide the lease for the property, original permit application and evidence when work began on the fifth floor, the Property Owner could appear at the hearing. D. B. I. And planning could conduct an inspection of the subject property to confirm elements represented in the lod and the Planning Department could provide an explanation regarding what factors are considered by the Planning Department when making a determination as to whether or not there are multiple uses. The april 1, 2020 meeting was canceled due to the shelterinplace health order. So this appeal was put on the call of the chair. There after put on the calendar for tonight with agreement of the parties. Vice president honder you need to make disclosure. I have hired the law firm of rose. I am a partner in project. Their appearance before this body this evening will have no effect. Commissioner chang. I want to confirm you have had the opportunity to review the materials for the hearings on january 29 and march 11th. I have. Okay. Thank you. We will hear first from the Planning Department. Each party three minute was no rebuttal. Planning department first. Mr. Sanchez. This matter is continuance of appeal of letter of determination for 838 grant within the chinatown retail district. The letter of determines relates if the top two floors were abandoned which contain nonconforming restaurant use. The board requested the planning and building conduct a site visit. October 7 of this year joe duffy and i conducted the site visit. I am happy to describe those results in more detail. It reinforced my opinion. Supporting the Zoning Administrators determination this is one use. Iit is one use. We were able to walk through the space and given access to all of the spaces in question to make that determination. We do believe the fifth and sixth floors function together. I did not observe work on the fifth floor that would require believe permit review. There was work done on the fifth floor, banquet hall area fresh eping with new carpet and painting and generally cosmetic details. Happy to go into further detail. I have three minutes to speak. That will be available for questions should the board have them. Thank you. I do not see any questions we will hear from inspector duffy. You have three minutes. Commissioner, joe duffy, d. B. I. As mr. Sanchez pointed out we did travel to the building and did a walk through. I agree with mr. Sanchez assessment of the site visit. I am available for questions. Thank you. We will now hear from the Property Owner or the tore for the Property Owner, mr. Reuben. Yes, i just opened things up. Good evening. I am jim reuben of the law firm working with the Property Owner. As you have heard at the conclusion of the last public hearing on march 11th the Commission Voted 41 to continue to allow time to obtain a report from a site visit by the Planning Department and d. B. I. Representative and to see material from us the project sponsor and owner. Appellant was arguing fifth and sixth floors were independent. The Zoning Administrator viewed it single premises. Horizontal premises. You have heard from the Planning Department afternoon dpi. The Property Owner was asked to provide a copy of lease, original permit for the work at the site and evidence of when work started on the fifth floor. Redacted copy of lease is provided showing premises and use. Owner is with me now in the room. We have a full copy of the lease if there are questions. I check with the board before redacting. I wanted to make sure we were respectful in getting the Board Members the relevant information they sought. We have provided a copy of the main permit for the work to the restaurant dated october 13, 2017, well before the expiration of three years. Can you put up the next permit . Although we continued to view both floors as single restaurant, we were able to find and show you a permit dated jult the work is on the fifth and sixth floor. It is in the middles. Soft demo of the fifth and sixth floor in the middle of the permit. Whether you think of the whole restaurant as covering two floors, which was the Zoning Administrators opinion, and i think accurate one, or you view the floors as distinct, the Zoning Administrator had the permit to show work started on the restaurant including fifth floor within the timeframe. One more note. As practical matter we highlighted the fact the request for letter of determination was very late in the process. There is nothing in the code precluding such request there were many opportunities to appeal the entitlements or issuance of the original permit years ago. Appellant did not do. The city issued the certificate of final completion in march. Up until last week when dining was shut down this was operating at al allowable 25 . When the shutdown is lifted they will about 25 or so people from the immediate area. That is your time. Okay. Thank you. We will now hear from the appellant, mr. Young. I am deferring my time to our council. I am starting the timer now. Good evening. Council for the appellant. I will speak for two and a half minutes and leave remaining time with mr. Young. We have reviewed the documents submitted by opposing council and our observation so far is none of the additional documents to date show concrete use. That should show abandonment of the fifth floor. The copy of the lease proofs this point where the lease was made and i am quoting made this eighth day of april 2019. To refresh the board. The restaurant closed in 2014. Well beyond the three year time period that constitutes abandonment of use. Second point that the soft application is not determined by itself. We looked through it and that language only indicates the demo work was suggested for the fifth and sixth floor but not done on the fifth floor. In fact, if you look at february opposing council i it affirmed e only work on the fifth floor was light construction work at best. There were no significant remodeling work for the statute of limitations. That february 2020 brief talked about painting, refinishing Hardwood Floors and replacing carpeting. Minor work. It didnt contemplate demolition. We are talking concrete use. The intended use is not use. Finally, and this is perhaps something that malcolm can speak to. No communications were carried on despite the boards directive to do so between the community and attorney. We can all say covid threw things for a loop, too, but a substantial amount of time has passed and we were unable to maintain communications. I want to point out this decision today has significant precedence here. For better or worse we have been alerted that the one of the last two remaining Community Banquets restaurants is going to close by december 31st because of covid, which leafs the community with one Community Banquet restaurant left. If we have a shot you need to make sure the fifth floor can go to conditional use hearing by affirming this appeal so that the community can have a conversation about restoring the fifth floor to Community Banquet use. Thank you. Thank you. We are now moving to Public Comment. I want to check to see how many people are here to provide Public Comment. Raise your hands, please. Please raise your hand if you plan to give Public Comment. What is the allotted time by the president . That is up to the president. First we will see how many people are here for Public Comment. It looks like we have 24 people waiting. I see 12 hands raised at this point. I am not sure if everyone is here. President lazarus. I recommend two minutes this was heard previously so i believe that will be sufficient. We are asking for supporting information so two minutes per speaker. [please stand by] yung yeu santaca yung yeu. I am very disappointed about the unwillingness to compensation and unwillingness to collaborate. We stand against the project sponsor. That project is really significant, and its a gentrification project, changing land use and really working against chinatowns cultural fabrics. Operator 30 seconds remaining. I would like to urge the commissioner to turn down the project and ask the project sponsor to reach out and talk and collaborate with the community. Thank you very much. Clerk thank you. We will now hear from vincent tan. Hello, commissioners. My name is vincent tan [inaudible] a 51yearold Civil Rights Organization in San Francisco chinatown. Our headquarters [inaudible] and now six years, six years. When this issue was before you in january, the community warned you of the great risk facing chinatown, that it could go the fates of many other chinatowns in north america that have been lost to physical expenses and gentrification. And the best way to ensure is to make sure that significant buildings of land have Community Input and public processes. Now more than ever, thats even more urgent. The covid19 pandemic has shuttered buildings across chinatown, and businesses have faced additional dynamics of racism and rising antiasian hate th hate, its more important than ever to make sure that processes like this board of appeals proceeding with go forward. Clerk 30 seconds remaining. So i ask you to extend our opportunities to engage with all the stakeholders on such a significant and important use for chinatown. Thank you. Clerk thank you. We will now hear from jeremy lee. Mr. Lee . Good eng othvening, preside lazarus and others. I am jeremy lee, the president of the rose pak democratic committee. Institutions like the empress are so important to chinatown. Banqu banquet halls like the one at empress is a part of our culture. I remember everyone celebrating and feasting on elaborate dishes. I remember sneaking up to the upper level and just being amazed by the birds eye view of the glimmering red and gold decor. It was a space specifically for my community. It was only because the empress was an affordable space for middle class family. We cannot allow another one of our institutions to be gent gentrified, so encourage you to order the project sponsor back to the stable with stakeholders. Thank you. Clerk thank you. Calvin lui . Good evening, commissioners. My name is calvin lui, and a concerned citizen. Clerk i dont mean to disrupt, but it says sfgovtv is down. I dont know if you want to pause until that announcement is made. Clerk okay. Were going to let them know right now. Operator im going to write them right now. Clerk thank you. We can restart the time. Good evening, commissioners. My name is calvin lui, and i am a concerned citizen. I spoke to this back in march concerning the project sponsors credibility, and i have not heard from the project sponsor since that meeting. I am also the president of the c. D. C. , the chinese democratic club. We have had many dinners over the empress over the last four decades, including one where Dianne Feinstein was the keynote speaker. So id like to support the appeal. Thank you. Clerk okay. Thank you. Mr. Lui, can i ask you a question . Were you a past tenant of the building . Yes, i was. Can i ask you what happened there . Yes. I was a past tenant of the building for 40 years, and when i left the premises, the project sponsor would not give me back my security deposit. He said i trashed the place, but in my eyes, it was 40 years. Theres a lot of things normal wear and tear that i see. So did you leave voluntarily . Well, the rent tripled i would say quadrupled from what i was paying, so i had to leave. Okay. Thank you. Clerk okay. We will now hear from larry yee. Mr. Yee . Hey, everybody. My name is larry yee. Im born and raised in chinatown. I have a rich history of the chinatown and the empress of china. I saw it actually built back in the 1960s, when i was a little kid. I used to play in portsmouth square and saw a building being there and wondered what that was all about. But my family association, the yee association, had many banquets over at the empress of china. It was a rich history and culture for me as i learned there was more to chinatown than just where i lived. There was a banquet hall, Something Special when family and friends gathered. You would Say Something like christmas or hanukkah or those kind of events where you cannot buy it. It is only earned, and you learned to experience. So i also had my daughter and sons baby parties, so we shared that rich history, too. Sometimes, my daughters go back to the pictures and view it and review it with her daughter, too. Its sort of sad to see the ballroom close. We have over 300 active associations. Im an active leader in chinatown. Operator 30 seconds. Making sure that families that live there can go there and be a part of that, so i ask that the board here accept the appeal, and then, that the sponsor makes sure that we talk and reach out to the communities and build a bridge. Its such a beautiful place for all of us. Operator thats time. Thank you. Thank you. Clerk thank you. We will now hear from the caller whose number ends in 1566. Try pushing star, six. We cant hear you. Can you hear me now . Clerk yes. Thank you. Welcome. You have two minutes. Hello. My names doug chan. Im appearing this evening not as a city commissioner or as an attorney, but as the president of the Chinese Historical Society of america. Our organization became concerned regarding this case because weve documented well the centrality of banquet culture to the life of chinatown. In fact, the empress of chinas special to me because they told me when i may get married based on the availability of their banquet hall. We were concerned because it is our understanding from the administrator of record that the board of appeal commissioners, or certain of them had repeatedly asked for the project sponsor to engage with the community, and here we are, nine months down. We certainly did not receive any outreach or communication from the project sponsor, and we have heard from our sister nonprofit agencies in chinatown that communication has been nonexistent or negligible. In fact, we believe that the appeal has merits, and that the we support the appeal, particularly with respect to the fifth floor regarding the abandonment of use under the section of planning code 183a, so we concur with the previous commenters and the appellant. Thank you very much. Clerk thank you. We will how near from the Chinese Culture Center Cultural center. Good evening, commissioners. My name is jennie lum. I am the executive director of the chinese cultural center, and earlier this year, i joined my colleagues and the community to come together to take a stand for Community Space and the empress and the importance of our Community Banquet halls. The empress is a home for the community to gather. I think all of us have expressed that, and it happens in a year that has exposed how critical and important our shared Community Gathering spaces are when chinatown is deeply impacted by covid19 and is really struggling. Like many of my peers here, chinatown has had many banquets and celebrations at the empress. I got to experience the Community Celebrate and come together, and it is a safe space for community building, sense of belonging, and the relationships that are keeping chinatown alive at this time. I really hope that the project sponsor will have a dialogue with the community and to ask the commissioners to please support the appeal because the core of these Community Banquet halls have brought Intergenerational Community members for the last 50 years, and it is absolutely critical that it is part of the community for the next 50 years. Thank you. Clerk thank you. We will now hear from mattiam mormino. Commissioners, as a young immigrant to this country, i came here when i was 25. Im originally from italy. Nothing could my love and my belonging to the community in chinatown like Community Banquet hall. You know, i dont know if youve ever had the experience of stepping into one of these places. It seems like, you know, youre at someones wedding every time you gather with so Many Community leaders and community friends. Covid19 has just, you know, exploded or relationships and disintegrated our community unity. We havent gotten to, you know, pat each other on the back, we havent gotten to hug, and where that happens more than any other place in chinatown is at our community halls. But this is not just a neighborhood argument. This is a technical argument. The fifth floor, per all the paperwork submitted by the attorneys of the project sponsor, has not seen any legitimate work. That supports the argument that the restaurants use on the fifth floor has been abandoned, and this is a very simple matter when it comes down to operator 30 seconds. What you heard. This is a project sponsor that is trying to skirt the law and doesnt have any intention of coming to the community and communicating with the community, although commissioner swig repeatedly told the project sponsor that when you have such a turnout, both eight months ago and tonight, there is a need to come together. We ask you to support the appeal and let us all come together. Clerk thank you. We will now hear from bettwina lee. Miss lee . Sorry. Can you hear me now . Clerk yes. Anything for us tonight . Well, i dont know who that was, but im not here to sing. Im here to represent the Chinese Cultural Association in San Francisco. I am the executive director, and we are at present housed in the hilton hotel. You know, i am chair now here, but my history in San Francisco started probably 65 years ago, when we used to load ourselves into a buick, cross the bridge, and go to toto restaurant on jackson above grand avenue for the sunday dinners that my family would have there. A pull back to chinatown, the chinatown that my grandfather was born in, that my father was born in. We lived in berkeley or oakland because during the earthquake, my maternal family moved over to oakland, but ive lived in berkeley since we came back to california. In the 60s and the 70s, we would come back to chinatown especially for the banquets, the wedding banquets. The youngest son in my husbands family had a noholdsbarred fill it as tight as you can wedding banquet in the empress of china. It is a memory that we all share. Operator 30 seconds. In the 90s, i was there for the banquet that the Culture Center had, and i also witnessed all of the changes in china unto. Chinatown. We all need to have a place that we can come together. I ask that the board of appeals grant this appeal so that we can continue this dialogue to have an understanding of what we need in chinatown for the growth of the city. Operator thank you. Thats time. Thank you. Clerk thank you. We will now hear from donald lu. Mr. Lu . Hi. My name is donald lu, and good evening, commissioners. I grew up in chinatown and have been to the empress of china many times over the years, banquets, community events. Im sad that we no longer have a space which is as grand as the empress of china to continue some of these event and banquet. I am also a member of the Chinese Chamber of commerce, but im not speaking on their behalf. Im here to voice my support for this appeal. With the loss of numerous businesses in chinatown because of the pandemic, and with only one Community Banquet space remaining, balancing the needs of the merchant and community is now more important than ever. The Community Banquet is also essential for Chinese Americans to share our history and consult with good food and community. I urge you to support this appeal to the community so the project sponsor can continue to have a solid conversation about how to work together. Please support this appeal. Thank you. Clerk thank you. We will now hear from gail gilman. Miss gilman . Yes, thank you. Good evening, commissioners. My name is gail gilman, a resident of San Francisco in north beach for over 25 years, and a former department of building inspection commissioner. And as a former commissioner, i use to call into question the use of the fifth floor. Youve heard a lot about the cultural significance about banquet halls in chinatown, but what i want to elevate to you as building commissioners is the Building Department and building inspector has recently concluded that theres been no work done on the fifth floor. As someone who testified at the march hearing, you urge you to uphold this appeal for two reasons. One, commissioner swigs request that the applicant reach out to the community. From my knowledge, none of that has taken place. And secondarily, if work on the fifth floor has ceased, to me, that is a violation of original permitted that were pulled, and thus, not acting in good faith. It is obvious that the applicant is not acting in good faith; that they are using both their financial might, and you could say the clause of covid19 to not reach out to the community. There was ample opportunity for the client to reach out to the community to be in negotiations on the cultural significance that youve heard from many other speakers, but the operator 30 seconds. Should be a reason why you should uphold this appeal. Let the appellant and the applicants work together. Stay safe, and happy holidays. Thank you. Clerk thank you. I dont see any other hands raised. If youre here for Public Comment, please raise your hand. You please star, nine. If youve already joined, please raise your hand. If youre having difficulty raising your hand, please Say Something in the chat. Okay. I believe this concludes the public oh, we do have one hand raised no, the hand is down, and i believe is there anyone here for Public Comment. As a reminder, the standard of comment is err or abuse of discretion. President lazarus commissioners . Commission Vice President honda . Vice president honda i have a question for acting senior inspect inspector joe duffy. Clerk its chief inspector. Vice president honda oh, chief inspector. Im sorry. Joe, can you give us the definition of a soft demo . Definition of a soft demo . Commissioner honda, when d. B. I. Issued a Building Permit and we talk about soft demo, we do talk about removal of nonstructural ceiling and wall furnishes. You could talk about basically getting it ready for construction. You might pull a soft demo permit to get ready to paint. Vice president honda so does painting require a permit . No, no, it doesnt. Vice president honda so generally speaking, when someone were to pull a sopermi for soft demo, that would mean it requires some work, so that would mean removing fixtures or doing something. Thats correct. That would mean theyre going to do some soft demolition of a nonstructural nature. Sometimes its not defined, but there are some reasons in the code why we do that. In a commercial space, someone might do some demolition. A lot of times, a landlord will get a space ready for a demolition. Vice president honda could you remind me, once the soft demo was pulled in july 2016, when was the next permit pulled, and for what area . Well, youve caught me by surprise. Ill have to look it up. Vice president honda dont worry. I have a question for the project sponsor. Mr. Rubin . Im off mute. Vice president honda question is at the last hearing, although we did not condition it, several commissioners, including commissioner swig asked that you would do some engagement of the community and do some outreach. Can you give me an idea of what you did, when you did it, and what was the response . So, many of you know me, including you, commissioner honda, and i am the most outreaching lawyer in town. I am always after trying to get a resolution and do, and that is my reputation, and im proud of that reputation. I dont specifically recall being told to do outreach, but i did it any way. I did call alan low on a couple of occasions. Alan low represented malcom and ccdc on this property on some other issues, and i asked alan if there was something to talk about, and i was told that he was not getting a response. Vice president honda okay. And so you heard from many of the Community Leaders, especially from the, you know, the chinese organizations. Did you hatch out to any of them this evening . I hadnt finished what i was saying. I was also at the site inspection with joe duffy and Scott Sanchez, and my impression was what they saw was a single restaurant. Vice president honda that was not my question. My question was regarding the outreach. Yeah. So i asked scott, when he told me thats what he saw, if he would call malcolm and suggest that maybe there was something to talk about. I dont want to nail anybody. Thats not what im after. He told me he called malcolm in fact i emailed him about ten days ago and asked him if he ever got a response. Vice president honda but we didnt ask the department to reach out to the community. This is not an argument. This is what i did. I put that in the bucket to reach out. Vice president honda so you didnt reach out. Thats what i got. So the next question is that your client pulled a soft demo in july 2016, and he stated both fifth and sixth floor. Yes, you saw it. Vice president honda so when was the next permit pulled, and what did you do on that permit . I dont know that. There was a number of permits pulled. If youd like me to do that, i can, but i cant do it here. Vice president honda we heard what the definition of a soft demo is from the department. Like one of the speakers said tonight, intent is not what it is. Its actually performance, and if you pulled a soft demo permit and did not do any soft demo because that was pulled in july 2016. The restaurant closed in 2014, so that as of july as of december 31, 2017, that the threeyear abandonment had taken place. So the i dont know when the next permit was pulled. There may have been some between the 2016 permit and the one that im about to say, but on october 13, 2017, still within the three years, a permit was pulled to do major work. That was the major work for the entirety of the restaurant, and that was also attached to the letter that i sent to Vice President honda yeah. The october 13 permit i reviewed during the building package, and that was specifically pertaining to the sixth floor and not the fifth floor. Well, it said the sixth floor on the, you know, on the permit, but our position, and i think the Zoning Administrators position, and what joe duffy and Scott Sanchez saw, was the work that was done in the kitchen, and thats the kitchen that serves both floors just like if it was a horizontal restaurant of the same size. Vice president honda thank you, mr. Rubin. Thank you. Youre welcome. Mr. Honda, i do have the information you requested if you still want it. Vice president honda yes, please. So the soft demo permit for the sixth floor was applied for in september of 2016, and the fifth floor full t. I. Was applied for in october 2017, so about a years difference. Thank you. Vice president honda okay. And on the thank you, mr. Duffy. Thank you. President lazarus i have a question for mr. Sanchez, please. Scott, are you yes, im here. President lazarus my understanding is that your determination or the Zoning Administrators determination was based on the pulling of a permit within the sort of, if you will, a required window. If that permit had been issued but somehow lapsed, and i dont know that i recall or even know what the life of the permit is, it seems to me its a couple of years, where would we sort of be with that determination, if ive phrased that question properly . Certainly. So that question is whether this use, which is a nonconforming use, which has been abandoned. If a use is discontinued or abandoned, theres been an intent to abandoned within three years, then the use is abandoned. As a nonconforming use, it is not currently allowed under the zoning, so if the board were to overturn the letter of determination and find that floor is abandoned, that use would no longer be allowed. The Community Banquet hall would be gone forever until a zoning change or some other political solution were to be found. So if the goal is to preserve this as the restaurantbanquet hall use, a letter of determination does that. But when looking at if something has been abandoned, in some cases, even simply attempts to lease the property, because we know properties cannot simply be maintained in San Francisco. There may be instances, especially in down economies, that someone may be offering a place or rent but cannot find a suitable tenant. So in some cases, within more than three years, but still trying to find tenants, we determine the property has not been abandoned. In this situation, now, were coming to this question and the letter of determination, and the letter of determination, the Zoning Administrator based that on the permits that was cited in there, the permit specifically for that major sixthfloor t. I. , and that was a substantial remodel. Im happy to describe the space in further detail, but while on two stories, it is fundamentally interconnected. You have mezzanines, one at the front and one at the rear of the property. The one mezzanine on the west has rest rooms which serve the restaurant above as well as the banquet hall on the fifth floor, and this is a fifth floor mezzanine, so it opens up onto the banquet floor space. On the fifth floor, the east side, there is the dish washing facilities, so theres elements that are critical to the operation of both levels at that mezzanine. I did not see a fifth floor that would be operating separately. It was stated in the previous hearing that there was a separate kitchen numerous times. Ive walked through that property many times, and i did not see anything like that. The full kitchen is a massive kitchen on the sixth floor. It does kind of all fit together. There was work i think to correct one of the commenters, there was work done on the fifth floor. My statement was it was painting, freshening up, new carpeting. It wasnt as if that space didnt have any intent to be abandoned. That was my intent in walking through that space. Im happy to answer questions if the board has them. President lazarus i appreciate everything that you said. It was enlightening, and think it does address the statement that this all goes way if its overturned. But the permit that was sought and received, if that permit had been allowed to lapse, for lack of you doing anything under it, and then, somebody came back and asked whether the use it been abandoned, would it be a different response . I think we would have to see the facts of a different scenario. Wed have to see the facts before making a determination, but simply filing the application within three years is fact that they did not intend to abandon it. If they did file the permit within that time frame, its demonstrating that they dont have an intent of abandoning that use. President lazarus okay. Great. Thank you very much. Vice president honda mr. Sanchez, so as you mentioned that the use would be abandoned, then, it would require a c. U. Going before the kbrss, which at this point would hope that up again, am i correct . This is not an allowed use under the planning code, so if it were to be abandoned, it could not be restored without a change in policy. It would need legislation enacted by the board of supervisors, approved by the Planning Commission, approved by the mayor to specifically provide a path to restore the use, so that would be a political solution that would need to occur, otherwise, it simply couldnt and the Property Owner may choose if the board finds it abandoned, they may choose to never reopen theres no requirement that they could open a banquet hall year. Vice president honda i think he said a massage parlor. Some Institutional Uses are allowed on the third story. Vice president honda and i think they were potentially going to turn it into a we works facility. I think it was even the previous owner may have sought a letter of determination to try to justify that there was legal office space on some of those lower levels, and that that determination did not go anywhere. They were not able to justify that, but that is not part of this. This letter of determination is related to we believe its a fifth and sixth story restaurant and banquet hall, as the community would like it to be. Theres other issues beyond the planning realm, perhaps, and how that space is used, but under the planning code, its a restaurant, fifth and sixth floor. To have a banquet hall there is something the community wants. President lazarus commissioners, are there any other questions or comments, and if not, is anybody prepared to make a motion . Vice president honda i actually would like to start, if you dont mind me doing so, madam president. As was mentioned in the last two hearings, there was a separation between the fifth and sixth floor of that property. And although there are some Board Members that have been to that facility, ive been there many, many times, and there is a separation. The fact that it requires a threeyear abandonment permit, and that the permit that was sought was never acted on or done anything to indicated that there was abandonment of the fifth year and not the sixth floor of that property. I dont have any issues with the sixth floor of the property, because to be honest, the paperwork looks appropriate. But looking at what was done regarding the fifth floor, which is, you know, has been called banquet facilities, i dont believe that they specifically that is a nonconforming use that that had been officially abandoned, in my opinion. Also, on the community side, which were hear to determine what is before us officially on the community side. As members of the public have expressed and we cannot make the owner come to the table to these Community Leaders or these community departments, but this board, you know, less than making it a condition, asked for specific reachout for the community, and this has not happened. I believe that far east, who now holds a lot of community events, is saying because of covid, they may not be able to open after. And we just lost asia gardens because thats going to be a supermarket now, and its going to be an apartment building. But on the legal merits, i believe that they have not they have not continued the use, and the use was abandoned because it had expired more than three years the soft demopermit that was applied for in 2016, i believe, as the Building Department has expressed, none of that work was even started or done. So its not just the intent, its the actual usage of that. And so i would make a motion to to what is it . Clerk grant the appeal. Vice president honda grant the appeal. Thank you, madam director. Clerk on the basis that the appellant abandoned his decision. Candid i hear that the propy owner was here today . Did i hear that correctly . Vice president honda i believe hes next to council. Were heard from the community loud and clear that theres a strong desire to hear how the Property Owner had not come to the table, and i wanted to ask directly if the Property Owner is willing to come to the table to talk to the community. Sure. So im im moving my screen so that you can see john yee. Good evening, commissioner. Good evening. So can you speak a little bit about what the community has asked and about what you responded, and just in my review of the previous two cases, it seems like theres been this has gone on for quite some time, and id like to hear from you. Absolutely. Let me hear where commissioner honda left off. He was inquiring about the soft demo permitted in 2016. When we took over the building, it was our intention to keep the empress building, but there was so much concern about what we would find when we opened up the space. When we went into the building, it was basically a rain forest on the fifth floor. The kitchen on the sixth floor, the water went down to the ballroom. Everything was tied into the ceiling on the fifth floor, so basically, you cannot work on the sixth floor without doing the fifth floor. We needed a soft demo permit to prove what was necessary or what we can salvage from the restaurant, and from our investigation, nothing had been salvaged. In fact, the reason the construction took so long is because we received our soft demo permit approximately december 14, 2016. Two months into construction, we were interrupted by ccdc. Well any way, long story short, my Construction Contractor tried to do everything by the permit, which we followed. Our intention is to keep the ballroom as a ballroom and the restaurant as a restaurant. Our intent was to put another restaurant on the street level, where there would be two restaurants in the building. In fact, what we wanted to do is to bring back the glory days into chinatown. When empress of china opened before, it was an upscale restaurant, and we wanted to replicate what that was 48 years ago. And throughout the process, weve been intervened, and when were about completed with the project or just be which is fine. We go through the procedures, we go through the code, we followed the books, and finally, were there. We opened up, and i guess we are here at this hearing, and we tried to explain to everyone, we have reached out to my counsel have reached out to the community, who i thought was alan low, who was representing malcolm yeung, who was the appellant. And also, we do support the community. In fact, when the Community Found out that we were open, i believe it was Chinese Hospital approach us about sponsoring a thanksgiving luncheon, we which happily did. We asked them just to support what was there, and the people we hired are from chinatown. The kitchen consists of six full time chinatown members, and our intent is to get up to 25. We want to maintain the restaurant as a restaurant. As the attorney for the appellant, id like to point out that attorney alan low is on the line. President lazarus excuse me. Youre not allowed to comment. Commissioner low, did you get your question answers . I guess. Im just curious about the communitys pleas about it sounds like it sounds like youve addressed the request for a banquet over thanksgiving, and there have been requests for, you know, the historic uses of this banqu banquet hall to be accessible to the community, and im understanding there are limitations to that, but has there been thought about, you know, the accessibility and how the affordablity of the hall might be made to the community . I understand this is a business, i just wanted to ask to see how you respond to that. I spoke with the partners, and we tried to figure out a way to work around it, but trying to restrict the price to certain things in banquet hall is next to impossible. I believe its 16 an hour now, and you have so many extra costs in hiring people. As i said before, were here to support the community. If theres a need, well try to, but we cant be losing money. Financially not feasible. In fact, when we went into the building, we had talked to the Community Leaders. In fact, i spoke with the Community Leaders. So commissioner chan, if the question is are we, the owner, willing to meet with people in the community, the answer is yes. I dont know that thats related to the question that is before this board now, which is a letter of determination issued by the Zoning Administrator that has tons of precedent, which youre aware of from having worked in the Planning Department and was accurately issued and appealed two years or so after all the permits were issued. So well still meet with the community if the request is made, but i think the questions been answered. Thank you. President lazarus commissioner swig, you had a question . Commissioner swig im confused. I just need to go through a path here, please. Mr. Sanchez, if we uphold this appeal, grant the appeal, then, the banquet hall about go away forever. That is correct. If the commissioner swig thank you. May i ask a thank you. Commissioner swig ive got to finish. Sorry. Commissioner swig thank you. Im a little slow. Youll get used to it. Mr. Young, if the what confuses me here is if you get your appeal, youre guaranteed one thing, and that is to lose the banquet hall to the community forever. Is that your goal . If not, what is your goal . Commissioner swig, what were guaranteed is the opportunity to have a conversation with the project sponsor regarding Affordable Access to that commissioner swig no, no. I know listen, im i wouldnt have picked up your gauntlet in the previous hearing if i didnt know this. What im saying is this is a winlose situation. You win, congratulations. You lose, community loses the banquet hall. So is your goal to lose the banquet hall by winning the appeal . Our goal, commissioner swig, is to have a conversation in a reasonable context with project sponsor regarding the use of the fifth floor and the accessibility of the community because were losing every available banquet hall commissioner swig i understand this, but if commissioner honda is successful in getting my support for this motion, which im not sure that im ready to do, then we are guaranteeing one thing. It doesnt matter whether you have a Community Whether you have a conversation or not. Its over. You will have lost the opportunity of having this banquet hall. Are you clear on this . Commissioner, im im id respectfully disagree with your characterization. In that case, i believe the project sponsor will have to come around and have that conversation, you know, frankly, because its the right use for the community and commissioner swig were not arguing that. Im sorry. So im going to ask mr. Sanchez for clarification on your position. Mr. Sanchez, if tonight, we pass this appeal, we approve this appeal, is that is that banquet hall gone forever . That would be the effect of the determination. I imagine, you know, there could be legal challenges to the boards decision, especially because this is not an appeal of a permit, right . This is an appeal of a letter of determination added on top of all the permits that they received legally to allow the use on the property, so we would have to figure out how we are going to implement it, but the effect would be if the use is abandoned, they cant continue it. They would need legislation, to bring in the District Supervisor and to have legislation to allow it to be restored. But thats only if the Property Owner chooses to go down that path. They dont have to. They could, you know, continue with a different use at that fifth floor. Theres no guarantee that, you know, they would you know, if the board overturns this, it cannot do that. Commissioner swig sorry. I disagree with commissioner hondas position. I dont think im going to be able to support it because i think the letter of determination was correct, and and if it goes in my direction versus commissioner hondas direction, this is not a competition, this is attempting to find consensus and collaboration. If it goes in my direction, then, the banquet hall sustains for sure, and what the owner has achieved is massive bad faith within his community, massive bad faith and potentially no support from a business standpoint from his community, which having been in the hotel and Restaurant Business for a long time, thats about what you dont want to do. But that would be his choice. But my i disagree. I think the letter of determination was correct, and also, i think it was correct, and it would be sad if we didnt find in that direction because the banquet hall for sure or pretty good chance would go away forever, but thats my opinion. President lazarus commissioner santacana . Commissioner santacana wow. I raised my hand a long, long time ago. Lets see if i can remember that. Commissioner swig thats because mouthy guys took over. Commissioner santacana yeah, its not your fault, commissioner. The appellant believes if approximawe give him what he wants, he will have additional legal leverage, and the situation is, as mr. Sanchez has pointed out, thats not quite true because once weve made our decision, weve made our decision. The project sponsor cannot then come to the table, come to some sort of satisfactory agreement to the appellant and magically start using the fifth floor as a banquet hall again. If we grant this appeal, the banquet hall is gone. Thats shooting yourself in the foot. Now we as a board have bent over backwards in this case frankly to provide leverage and to provide space for negotiations to occur. I think covid probably interfered with some of that space and changed the reality on the ground, but now, its time for us to make a decision about the law. We provided that space because it wasnt going to change any of the facts on the ground. The restaurant could continue to operate ill just speak for myself. I wont say we. They would permit people to have a frank discussion about what was at risk, but at the end of the day, the parties in this case were playing chicken, and Neither Party blinked, so its our turn to make the decision. And as far as i see it, i see it exactly the way commissioner swig does. Theres no question in my mind that the law does not favor the appeal. I wish this case would have been resolved differently, but my personal wishes have nothing to do with my role as a commissioner on this board, and so given that, i cannot support the appeal. President lazarus thank you, commissioner santacana. Commissioner chang . I recognize that my fellow commissioners have heard this case multiple times, and i have reviewed the materials, but im just trying to get up to speed, so forgive me for asking multiple questions. I did want to ask malcolm and his council wh his counsel what it is he would like to achieve or the ultimate scenario in this case . If the appeal was upheld, and the letter of determination was found in error, what would you like to happen . Ive heard you say you would like there to be room and the project sponsor to come to the table, but what do you mean specifically by that . So thank you, commissioner chang, for the question. Ill be very straight up about this. We would like you to grant the appeal. We would like you to put the project sponsor in a position where he has no use or legal use for the space without a legislative pathway. We would, as a community, like to be in a position to be able to have that conversation with the project sponsor from a position of leverage so the community could have access to the space as opposed to going on his word that hes going to make it accessible, which he just frankly contradicted by stating that the cost of employment and all the other things in the universe would make it impossible without having even explored it in any meaningful and sincere way. Thats the opportunity wed like to have. Yes, we are asking you for an equitable decision. I understand the legal arguments that youre putting forward here, and i certainly understand those, but sometimes the law and the administrative decisions need to consider equity, and this is a moment in which equity is paramount for this community, so thats what were asking for, and thank you, commissioner chang, for the question. Appreciate it. Vice president honda and i know that were in deliberation, but as many people are still on the line here, i believe that im debating about changing my motion. But the question to commissioner swig. You were very adamant at the last hearing that there be communication, and when i ask the the project sponsors attorney, there was none. I believe he had mentioned that he had talk today alan low, and i believe that talked to alan low, and i believe that he mentioned that mr. Low was on the line. Are you satisfied that what he requested was [inaudible] . Commissioner swig it doesnt matter. Of course, it didnt happen in the depth that i would have liked to have had it happen, but i have to lean on the words of commissioner santacana, and were here to uphold the law, and and, like i said, its real bad faith when youre trying to operate a restaurant in the future, and your core customer, which is your community, has been wronged. Thats a choice for the owner, and thats a financial and a business choice. But we are here to uphold the law, and i honestly believe the letter of determination is is correct and upholds the legal statutes, and i believe thats what commissioner santacana said. And im sorry that they didnt take my advice to have a collaborative and consensusdriven conversation, but thats not what were here for. Vice president honda okay. So evidently, my motion is going to fail, but for the record, i still have that motion on record. I mean, so thats still my motion. President lazarus commissioner santacana . Commissioner santacana how many votes are required to grant this appeal . Vice president honda four to grant the appeal and three to continue it, and, you know, the thing is i dont see four. Potentially theres three for a continuation for them to reach out again since they didnt do it the first time after we specifically requested it, but im going to ask for a roll call on my initial vote. Commissioner swig commissioner honda, if we continue it at this point, for what reason i dont know, but it would be a hail mary for mr. Yeung and the owner to collaborate. The restaurant is operating, not now, because we happen to have covid restrictive statutes in place, so if we continue it again, it would give one more opportunity for the two parties to have a conversation. I thats the only reason Vice President honda no, i guess it that they didnt come to the table before, and they wont again. Im just trying to give every opportunity, as this board has commissioner swig no, no, i would support a continuance, and i would ask mr. Rubin to get his client to the table and show good faith, and i would ask mr. Yeung to show good faith in meeting together with with the building owner, but im not sure its going to happen. But i would support a continuance for that purpose because weve got to what i see here is a tremendous potential loss for the community, and theres an assumption that they can get a legislative position to support the mandate for a banquet hall, but if they cant, one thing is for sure, that banquet hall, that legacy, that tradition disappears, a continuance continues that conversation, that i am assured of. Vice president honda all right. Ill change my motion to continue this item so that the parties and were making this, that the parties will come together and have a mindful and meaningful conversation. President lazarus commissioner santacana . Commissioner swig may i ask a question, please . President lazarus commissioner santacana had a question, actually. Commissioner santacana thank you. I have a question for mr. Rubin. Mr. Rubin, look, i try not to comment during these hearings on the settlement dynamics that may be going on outside of the context of what were doing, but it would be helpful to me to understand whether theres any room at the table for anything to actually happen in writing between your client and and the appellant. My suspicion is no, because two of us have already gone on record as saying we dont support the peal, so youve already won. But id like to id like to know the support the appeal, so youve already won, but id like to know the answer to that. So the question was addressed to me. I care about the community, i think as much as anyone on this call, and i will do everything i can to ensure that a real conversation does happen, but i cant commit that it will. But commissioner santacana well, thats not quite yeah. Commissioner santacana look, you dont have to answer the question if you dont want to. To some degree, its an unfair question, but i just i just want to understand whether you believe a continuance would be productive. It is an unfair question. Commissioner santacana yeah. Okay. So ill withdraw the question. I guess my comment, commissioner swig, is this weve already told weve already told the project sponsor that hes won this case. By showing our hand, i think weve destroyed the possibility of any compromise here, and thats exactly how it should work. The fact is that the law is the law, and we have provided space for these discussions, but i dont think i can support a continuance at this point for a conversation to occur that wont lead to anything. I wouldnt advise my client to give an inch at this point, and i dont know why mr. Rubin would, either. He has the votes, and and and i think the thing that troubles me about this case is that it took are we at a year now . Has it been a year . President lazarus yes. Commissioner santacana it took a year for mr. Yeung to tell us what he actually wants and to be forthcoming about the purpose of this, and if, a year ago, he had come to us and said what im looking for is for you to drop your role and your hat as enforcer of the law and do equity and force this owner to go to the board of supervisors so the people of community could get a hearing. I dont know what would have happened, but it would have been more productive than what this was, which was ultimately an effort at hiding the ball and trying to come up with legal arguments that werent meritorious. So here we are, a year later. Im sympathetic to the appellants cause but not the tactics. And if the board of supervisors are to be involved, if the people of San Francisco want a say, that can happen separate and apart from this body, the job of which is to decide cases. President lazarus i would just add, i have no intention of supporting a continuance. I was opposed to a continuance back whenever it was. I would also add it wasnt been just this period of time since this case has been before us, but the period of time since the permit was issued. And as our commission memorier who is an attorney has member who is an attorney has pointed out, this is a question of the law, and that is what needs to be decided. And i personally see no point in delaying that decision at all, so i am not supporting a continuance, and i am also not supporting the granting of the appeal. So do we have a motion . Vice president honda that was my motion. President lazarus to continue the item . Vice president honda right. President lazarus to when . Vice president honda how long do the parties need . Mr. Yeung, mr. Rubin . Were happy to talk wherever. Vice president honda i mean, were off three weeks, so its going to be three weeks. Im happy to have a conversation tomorrow. Clerk were busy in january. Were looking busy, but, i mean, we could limit i guess january 27, we could or january 6, we could try to squeeze it on, but its going to be busy. Be prepared to stay. Vice president honda which case is longer . The 26 which evening is longer . Clerk which evening is shorter . Clerk the 27 for now. And can you clarify the motion . Vice president honda so that theres Community Outreach between the project sponsor and the community. Clerk and do you want to specify what theyll be talking about . The use of the space . Vice president honda whatever they want to talk about. If they dont talk about anything, at which point, on the 27, as commissioner santacana indicated, the cards have been shown. But i believe that as our illustrious frank fung always said, that we are the peoples court. Im going to defend the community and give them one last community to strike a fire. Clerk okay. And just confirming that everyone is available on january 27 in the event this motion passes. Mr. Yeung, mr. Ahn, and mr. Rubin . Yes. This is jim rubin. My office has gone dark, but ill make myself available. Clerk okay. So we have a motion have Vice President honda to continue this matter until january 27 so that the parties will have a mindful and meaningful conversation, and the project sponsor can reach out to the community. So on that motion [roll call] commissioner swig i agree with commissioner lazarus, butbut i dont see harm to the permit holder because theyre closed any way. [roll call] clerk okay. So that motion carries, and the matter is continued to january 27. Do you want to specify parameters, president lazarus, for the hearing on january 27 . Are any new documented allowed to be submitted prior to the hearing . Did you want to limit it . Any way commissioner santacana heres what i would propose. Weve had people speak in Public Comment in this case a number of times. What i would propose is that the parties just send us a letter if they reach a compromise and the appeal has been withdrawn, and if we receive no such letter, then we will hear Public Comment i assume we have to hear Public Comment again on january 27 and take a vote. But i dont see any reason for there to be further presentation in this case. President lazarus and id just like to add that i believe your conclusion is correct, that the only alternative is a withdrawal of the appeal. Commissioner santacana yes. I think thats how i see it. I dont know if mr. Russi has a different view. Apparently not. President lazarus hes coming on. No, commissioner santacana, i agree with you. Vice president honda its still daylight where hes at. Geez. Where hes at . President lazarus i would ask that we allow each party three minutes to describe what did or did not happen . Clerk can we clarify, are we going to allow a letter or are we going to allow a statement of what happened . President lazarus can we do both . Clerk i just want to clarify what the parties need to do. You want, like, a onepage letter specifying the outcome of their discussions so at least you know in advance what they will be saying at the hearing . President lazarus ill defer to the people who are asking for the continuance. Vice president honda so that would be me, yeah. So i would just like a letter of when they met, what they spoke about, and the results of it. Clerk okay. So just a single page . Vice president honda single page should be fine. Clerk double spaced . Vice president honda yeah. Clerk and that letter should be committed the thursday prior to the hearing, and each party will have three minutes each at the next hearing. Vice president honda correct. Clerk okay. So does anyone have any questions about the process at this point because this will conclude the hearing if the matters continued. Thank you. Operator we now have one more item. Clerk we are now moving onto item number 7, and this is the annual report for fiscal year 20. Its been quite a year, so i i did provide this report to you last week, and just want to highlight a few points. Weve had less hearings, but we have had the same amount of time in hearings as we did last fiscal year 19, so just, i believe, because the format takes longer, as you know, the zoom platform, so and as you know, appeals are are down significantly, and thats in part because the permit issuance is down and related to covid. So we can go through certain pages or do we just want to open it up for questions . Its basically the same format that weve had in the past. Would you like me to go through it . President lazarus i would just like to comment that i did have a chance to look at this prior to it going out. I think our executive director did an excellent job of capturing what happened over the last year. She said it has become somewhat of a standard format, so i would suggest unless there are questions about specific pieces of information in the document but i do want to commend her, in the midst of Everything Else going on, to be able to pull this together, and i think to have a welldesigned and done document that people can look at if theyre curious how we spend our time. Clerk thank you, president lazarus. Vice president honda i agree with madam president that our e. D. Is amazing. The color pictures are really good at it. Clerk we have to thank alex lunway for selecting the pictures. Vice president honda i have to change my picture from 2009. Im still wearing the same tie. Clerk you havent changed a bit. Vice president honda but i have to commend you, julie, for all the extra stuff you do. Helping out someone like me thats very i. T. Challenged. Im very blessed to have someone like you as an executive director. Clerk thank you so much. It is he aa pleasua pleasure t the board. President lazarus most of the time. Clerk most of the time. President lazarus are there any particular comments on any section . Feel free. Commissioner swig no, just echo what youve already said. Thank you, julie, thank you, alec. Really tough year on so many levels. Before the hearing started, i commented a request to julie, can we please get back to normalcy, so i just pray for all of us and all of the constituency and we are back to normalcy that we can have this meeting in city hall as soon as possible, maybe in july. Thank you all for your support. President lazarus you just missed the free dinners, rick. Commissioner swig exactly. Exactly. Vice president honda do you guys remember . We had a covid scare the last time president lazarus i remember. I remember. Im also looking forward to meeting commissioner chang in person. Clerk wait, guys. Were not leaving yet. We have to adopt the report, but i also want to highlight the very last page, and Public Comment. Commissioner swig dont we have to have Public Comment. Clerk yes. I just want to highlight the last page, special recognition, for alec lunway, who has been absolutely phenomenal this year. Hes just been outstanding, and the picture that i put of here is him in his home office, which is his garage. Hes gone above and beyond president lazarus yea, alec. Clerk i just want to say hes a team player, a great employee, and great asset to the board. I just feel very lucky that he is with us, so i just wanted to shout out to him. Operator julie, its been great working with her, and shes a great asset to the board. Clerk so is there any Public Comment on this item . If so, please raise your hand. Okay, i dont see any Public Comment. Vice president honda i think a motion to adopt the budget as presented. Clerk okay. Well, were not quite at the budget yet. That would be will be. Vice president honda or the report. Clerk okay. So we have a motion from Vice President honda to adopt the fiscal year 20 report as submitted. On that motion [roll call] clerk okay. Thank you. That motion carries, and thank you so much for everything. I hope everything has a wonderful holiday. President lazarus happy holidays, everyone. Everybody stay safe, stay healthy. Id like to call the djp directors meeting to order. This meeting is conducted input pursuant to the brown act to facilitate teleconferencing to reduce the risk of covid19 during transmission at Board Meetings. The brown acts sets strict rules for teleconferencing. The governors executive order has suspended the rules. As noted on the agenda members may observe the meeting and they might offer Public Comment by calling the Public Comment phone number. Id like to welcome the members members watching us live on sf. Gov. Tv. Would you call the role. Change is sitting in as director hain any