director we're joined by the board at the taebl tangle it the zoning administrator he is representing planning commission and participating and sitting to his right is the deputy city attorney representing the department of public health and i saw mr. duffy representing the be department of building inspection mr. pacheco go over the guidelines and conduct the swearing in process. >> the board asks you turn off outline electronic device and the boards rules of presentation are appellants and permit holders each have 7 minutes to present their cases and 3 minutes for rebuttals people affiliated with the parties must conclude their comments within 7 minutes arrest to assist the board in the i cannot preparation of the minutes he members are asked but to the required to submit a speaker card to board staff when coming up to the podium the board loss welcomes our comments and incisions there are customer satisfaction forms on the left hand of the podium if you have requests about the board hearing please speak to the staff over the meeting or call the board office tomorrow morning on moigs between van ness this is broadcast live on sfgovtv cable channel 78 and dvds are available for purchase directly in sfgovtv thank you for your attendance at this point weigh conduct the swearing in process if you wish to have your testimony evidentiary weigh please stand please note that any member of the public my take submit a card under the sunshine ordinan ordinance. >> thank you mr. pacheco so we'll start with item one general public comment this is the opportunity for people to speak to the boarded within the board's jurisdiction not on toentsd agenda any general public comment seeing none, we've move to item 2 commissioner questions or comments commissioners. >> yeah. i wanted to basically alert the audience commissioner honda needs to leave. >> commissioner honda needs to leave at 7 we're going to try to continue to move 0 through the agenda. >> so if we have 3 commissioners present we're able to hear the matters and if the vote is needed the matter will think continued maybe we'll not get to that point any another commissioner questions or comments any public comment on item 2 seeing none, item 3 the consideration of the boards minutes if the last meeting the november 24th meeting. >> corrections or delegations a motion to approval the minutes. >> move to accept. >> okay mr. pacheco any public comment on the minutes seeing none, mr. pacheco if you could take roll. >> we have a motion from commissioner fong commissioner fung to adapt itself november minutes. >> commissioner president lazarus commissioner honda and commissioner wilson is absent the vote is 3 to zero the minutes are adapted. >> then call item 4a and b appeal both filed by mr. donny against the department of building inspection with the disapproval with the subject on e street and their appealing the denial of a permit to erect a building garage super s structure with 44 hundred ground floor feet and the denial of the permit to alternate a building to a second level of a backyard wansz the surveillance and i understand mr. donny is he in the room can you step forward to the microphone. >> i know mr. donny he is stuck in traffic i'm here for another item i don't know if switching it will be okay. >> commissioner shall we hold this off and give mr. donny a chance to get here. >> yeah. if he's on his way. >> with the presidents consent what we had a request to have the board rescheduling item 7 with the presidents content we can hear that request now item no. 7 appeal versus the department of building inspection other property at 26 thethth broderick street of on alteration permit to the violation revving of a planter box only we can give each party 3 minutes specifically on the issue of the rescheduling, sir you'll speak first and again is it it specifically on the issue of rescheduling. >> hi good evening, commissioners i'm i've viking on green street i'm requesting a rejerald of a hearing because this my preliminary engineer is out of town franklin and we've informed ms. goldstein we informed her as soon as i finding out figure out about that the issue is 3 permits by dbi to city planning marching wroodz woods is the checker at city planning he she sent back one it didn't need action the permit before you tonight the other two requires a city planning application and they're to be heard on december 18th and we had then asked that they all be combined since it's a comprehensive issue it was bifurcated because one it doesn't need city action and my engineers 3 of them and they've asked that we reschedule it so i believe mr. cox wrote ms. goldstein in january or february i contacted ms. goldstein and it is a technical issue it is involves a lot of engineering geotechnical and structural i'm not competent to speak so i ask you therefore reschedule it thank you. >> we can hear if the permit holder and commissioners to make sure you're aware many matter was taken tattoos board president who at that time, had to decline the request. >> good evening. i'm greg on behalf of the permit holder there's a building permit that is before you properly not related to the other two permits for for a roof-deck this involves s a 14 by 4 foot planter box that was over designed not to put a lateral loading load on the retaining wall in soil surcharge he's he concerned about and wants as to raise at the planning commission he's filed two compliment that dbi that's been upgrade and a third complaint that works its way through the process regarding the soil surcharge on his well please does not delay the permits the permits before mr. haney have a dr hearing if it could be months before issued and combined if you exceed the gentleman's issue to consider all 3 permits at once that is a simple permit please don't delay the resolution of one of those 3 permits. >> thank you any departmental comment. >> okay any public comment on the issue of the rejerald? seeing none, commissioners it's up to you whether anyone wants to make a motion to reschedule or we'll hear the case >> a question if for the gentleman the highly technical comments from your consultant they could have written that as part of the brief. >> because one of them is out of town i've requested them to do what they can and they haven't yet to at this point i feel a little bit of background eir background it is sirens 2009 the citywide filed against the gentleman multiple directors hearings increase been issuance to the building inspection commission there litigation committee asked the city attorney to enforce they does not come in with clean handicaps we've fiscally worked in a timely way since 2009 to get it resolved there's nothing i can do at this point, i suppose you tell me they lose and i win and we're back to the city attorney there's nothing else i can do. >> thank you you've answered my question. >> i had the same thought you did but the material could be submitted as part of the brief as far as the engineering back up. >> okay. >> it was this was a separate item. >> well. >> we didn't need to wait for planning to know what the other two. >> nobody provided any information on the other two except the brief the appellant didn't provide a brief i'm not inclined to - >> okay. >> all right. so this case will be harder in the orders on the agenda. >> in that case commissioners i'll be leaving and you can take this up with the city attorney. >> that's our prerogative. >> has mr. donny entered the room yet so commissioners item 5 which is the jurisdiction request subject property on 2250, 30th 34th avenue take jurisdiction over a permit which was issued omi on june 23rd the appeal period end and the jurisdiction can was filed on november 21st the permit business is - the media room add two bedrooms and add laundry room and add deck on second floor start with the requesters. >> you have 3 minutes to present your case. >> i'm david nicholson on 34th avenue directly north of the avenue thank you for a taking the time to meet with us on thoith after a major remodel the conversion of a two-bedroom to a four-bedroom how is it is an investment group not an individual that thailand's to live there we're here because of the conduct of a above mentioned property that will have a privacy issue with our bedroom window address extend 6 needed out into the yard we've learned on the south side of the said property a notice was sent out in october we were completely unaware we didn't have the right to appeal and had no knowledge we're fritter he are homeowners would no intention of movgs any contradiction will effect us long-term this lead to a impose that the deck was cut in half the privacy issue is of uppermost importance we're requesting the appeal window be reopened to allow us to express our concerns again, we didn't receive a notification in the department of building inspection and building we should have the right to appeal please fooks the right of privacy is legitimate and we wouldn't have been here today at the appropriate time we've resorted because this was the only option after learning that we missed the appeals window address the compromise reached between her and the owner we've called the appeals office which was wonderful but we didn't receive a notice of appeal we waited for the notice but it only explained the deck was decreased by half the jurisdiction appeal was not the way we would have preferred it. >> we can hear from the permit holder now. >> good evening, commissioners mark rubke benefit and rose on behalf of the permit holder i want to run through. >> i need to make a disclosure i'll retained them for a counselor but i want to hear this case. >> sorry. >> no problem i want to briefing round through the chronological construction started on this house from a single-family home to o a single-family home with more bedrooms for children the construction started in june and the requester has had conversation with the project sponsor and also the project manager none of which have to do with the deck the deck ass was added into the subject permit with the issue that the permit was filed in august the permit was issued in october the requester knew there was going to be a deck in the rear advised project in no time did they ask the project sponsor to make any sort of a change rewarding the deck the opposite neighborhood adjacent to the project sponsor filed an appeal considering that was the only appeal filled the permit holder came to a swift agreement to move forward with the construction project i can't say for certain how the norngsz would have gone with two permits but they wouldn't have ended swivelly i'm not here to talk about the project but i wanted to emphasize the chronicle order i can say it was handled by the city but let you know that the chronological of the approach the permit holder agreed to a settle they eliminated half of the deck and provided screen measures and other issues to address the concerns of one neighbor and now the other neighbor is asking to reopen the case to move the goal line to move the goal line and to allow us a second bite of the apple. >> excuse me. is there a reason why there was no belief. >> yeah. we were brought only board later. >> sorry. >> okay. thank you is there departmental comment. >> good afternoon joe david u duffey dbi the permit that is the jurisdiction requests is on filed on august 21st, 2014, and it was issued on the 3rd of october 2014 it went through building inspection and through the city planning the building inspection plan context and got approved was compliant with the media room and add one bedroom and bathroom and rear deck on second floor the complaint was a complaint filed on august 13th was received by dbi said they're working beyond the scope they realized they were filing the permit now the request is on for that's why the wording is on there not a stop order issue of the notification the bureaucracy that's the department the distinction within our department that does the notification only certain types it's called notification of certain additions notify the adjacent neighbors on both sides and the neighbors on the backside of the property i have a copy of the letter sent by dbi i asked the clerical people how they do that they send it out by regular mail i can put it on the overlay i think the one we're looking at was 2236 avenue. >> so is that overhead nope let's see mr. pacheco can you dark even that it's light on our monitor. >> that's a typical notice we send out to the adjacent pertains there are 4 properties that got the copies the property to the rear the significant property where the construction was taken placenta opening on october nicholson and others not every permit gets this notification but probably because they were doing the foundation work i'm not sure what triggered it was done by regular mail not recorded so the gentleman said they didn't get the notification not sure what happened i have notification we sent it. >> show us one of the other letters. >> oh, sorry this one went to 2249 the 23rd avenue one of the properties behind that and 2263, third avenue there is a fourth one somewhere i have it. >> well, i saw the one in the brief. >> yeah. i can check any package i thought i brought four sorry okay. i'll have a look you want to see the other one >> no, i saw it in the brief. >> anything any public comment on this item? commissioners, thank you for the opportunity to speak i'm ron do i own the home on 30th after the nickel sons and i are mature neighbors i want to speak in support off their request i received a notice when i received any notification letter i telephoned the name on the letter the gentleman is a part of the, llc p little owner i asked the gentleman about the deck the second floor deck he never called my back but his project manager contacted me i filed an appeal and we came to an agreement the day i was restoring any appeal i saw dave outside any house he was not aware he had a voice in the progress he may have had conversation but that's entirely different i recall any notification letter may have taken the slowest path it was dictated october 3rd the postmark the 6 and to my home the 10th i regret that i didn't have time to cooperate with the neighbors but my work schedule didn't allow me to respond i find out i was wrong i showed david the notification letter i received he was clear about never having received a letter like myself he's an immediate adjacent neighbor i was surprised to learn he wasn't notified when i make contact with the owner i asked him about the plans he said he might rent it out to a nice family it left me with the distinct impression he is not going to live driver's license and in creativity dave and jennifer is going to stay there the nickel sons are planning on staying for the long haul there's no way to know it happened owe hover the long term consequence is to us and i'm asking the board to give the nickel sons the benefit of the dough by granting the request not are you paramount to meet their needs it gives those two long term residents the opportunity to participate in the process if like they've been properly notified >> thank you any other. seeing none, commissioners the matter it submitted >> well commissioners this was sent by regular mail it is difficult to prove either way but given the reasonable timing i'm declined to grant jurisdiction and allow them to present their case well, i guess i have a question do you mind come back i believe you said you had a conversation with the nickel sons on the day. >> it was outside the home. >> do you remember the date. >> i believe this was october wait a minute no, it. >> i thought you said october 15th and no, that was when i filled the appeal so i don't remember but i can look through my notes owe e and give it in about a minute. >> i was to see whether the timing was such they could file something. >> it wasn't the appeal time passed i filed my appeal

Related Keywords

Thailand , San Francisco , California , United States , David Nicholson , Joe David U Duffey ,