purchased this. pardon me? i am sorry. 599 athens streets is listing michelle at that address, and, come on. powerpoint do your thing. we see from the same directory, russia street, one showing the laundromat, and 3 shellings barnhart no -- bernardo geely. thank you very much. this clearly has been occupied as a dwelling unit. i think that this board has the discretion to correct the record and allow permits to be taken for the renovation and restoration of this dwelling so it can be used as affordable housing, as it always has been, and hopefully always will be in san francisco. thank you. vice president fung: the 3r is based on a number of things, but one of them is the current assessor reckons -- records, and the current assessor record shows it is one unit. the current assessor record. >> i am not so sure i agree with that, sir. the assessor's record is what i showed you, which shows two units, and what i included in your packet -- vice president fung: excuse me. let me go to the question. what you showed us showed two units, one residential and one store. if you go back to what you provided, in 1938, the assessor record showed it as two residential units and one office, and in one commercial. is that not correct? >> i read it as being revised, and if you take a look at what i have listed as exhibit 5, the assessor's building card. this document shows 801, 803 russia and lists of the 1938 inspection date, and above that, there looks to be a revision date from the 1950's, and that looks to me to be in the same handwriting as we have both for the athens added, and if you look down at the bottom of that front page, you see apartment one an apartment two. i think that that entry may have been made at the time of that second inspection in the 1950's. vice president fung: my question to you is in terms of the taxes they have been paying, it is only on one unit. >> i think that the assessor's rolls are showing two plus store. vice president fung: not from what i saw. i thought it was a total of two units in the building, one commercial and one residential. >> the database is what the planning information database is based on, the assessors' database, and that is showing both, all three addresses, and it is showing two units, and usually, that is referring to dwelling units. they would not call a commercial space a unit. vice president fung: but just down below that on the same form you had, it said one residential and one commercial. did it not? >> i believe what you are saying is that this record, that the 3r report on is understandable. i would agree with that. there is other evidence for a third unit. there are three electrical meters. we can go to the photograph on the overhead. with the other -- with the different addresses shown directly on the electrical meters. there are other elements of this, other elements that all contribute to the understanding that this has been used as a dwelling unit it's not since the 1930's then at least since prior to 1954, when parking might have been required to add eight dwelling units, so i believe this is something that could be interpreted as a dwelling unit, as having existed prior to the current planning code, and could be approved by this board as a correction of the record. i think that there was some discussion at the building department level about whether the record was correctly correct as one family plus commercial or not. they chose after their investigation to go back to a single-family plus store. i think it would be a very unfortunate circumstance to lose this unit. thank you. commissioner hillis: can you tell us what is the process? you said it is an onerous process to go through and legalize the unit. >> if this board chooses to correct the record, they will take permits -- commissioner hillis: i mean if you did not appeal this, and you went through -- >> they would be required to go through several processes. one would be an additional living space requiring the school district fees. they would have to meet open space and exposure elements of the planning code, which would require a variance, and the fees would be considerable. simply the preparation to legalize this unit would be considerably more than their income is over and an annual period, so -- commissioner hillis: how much is that? >> i did not, but i certainly could list some of those fees. the various application fee i believe is currently $2,100. something thereabout. plans preparation. this would be several thousand dollars. there are application fees that would be another couple thousand dollars. there are school fees treating this as if it were newly created housing. there is another couple thousand there. suddenly, it becomes in feasible for this family to maintain. commissioner hillis: that is kind of the process, so you are kind of short circuits in this process with this permit? >> well, what i am trying, what i tried to do for the lucchesi family, was to see if there was something in the record to indicate that it was more than one unit. i think it clearly shows that. they are not creating a new drilling in the basement and hanging a sign out. this is something already in the system, so i think it is a legitimate process that i am seeking to achieve. president hwang: the space that was recently vacated by a 30- year tenant. >> yes. president hwang: athens street? >> yes, it is. president hwang: and what you are trying to do in this permit is to try to legalize it without going through the permit. it has a kitchen and everything that is needed to live on. >> yes. an inspector duffy was there today. >> thank you. director goldstein: mr. sanchez? >> thank you. good evening, president hwang, vice president fung, and congratulations on your elevations. the subject property is in our zoning district -- it does not allow commercial districts. however, the ground floor used as a laundromat appears to be a nonconforming use that has continued over time. based on our records, which show it only being illegal single- family dwelling with the residential units on the second floor. the zoning would allow two dwelling units, and actually in this case, they do not have any on-site parking, but given a planning code amendment that occurred almost one year ago, if they were just adding one dwelling unit, they would not need a parking space, so they would be compliant if they saw -- had a permit, and also for exposure, because they do have the windows on athens. the issues i do see would be with open space. there is a useful open space requirement. this is a very small lots, 25 feet by 50 feet, and it has little weary are, said they would need to seek a justified variance from the open space requirement of the planning code, or they would need to put a roof deck or some other form of open space, so that would be the issue there. the current fees, the base, is $859. it goes up depending on construction costs. it would be up to $2,000. i do want to highlight that for the board. like i said, all the evidence, all of the records that we have indicates it is a single-family dwelling. we do not have any thing that's as it is a two dwelling unit. i will point out on our website, if you have not checked it out, i would encourage you to go look at. the san francisco property evaluation, including zoning. what we are seeing there is our plugged into the assessor's office, -- our plug-in to the assessor's office. the three addresses listed above that, i believe that was from a separate database, because one of the problems we have when looking addresses or property, you may get a corner property like this. if you are looking for athens, in our old system, it would take you know where if it did not have it as the legal redress. now, we're able to cross reference various addresses. that does not necessarily mean there is a legal dwelling unit there. we do not have any evidence of a legal dwelling unit. i will be available for any questions. director goldstein: mr. duffy. >> good evening, commissioners. i would like to echo the congratulations of the previous speakers on your appointments. yes, i went to the to 599 athens and to russia. unfortunately, these buildings, we have got some paperwork, but we do not had a permit which says it has the assessors' card, as you heard, and we have got some addresses, but we just do not have a print that says it is two units. that 1952 permit, i think it was, could be the addition of a second unit. it just does not give a good description. it talks about adding a partition and a bathtub, and that is what i saw on the ground floor unit. there ceiling heights are appropriate. there ventilation seems to be ok. there has obviously been a kitchen in there at some point. the cabinets were gone today, but it was clearly a kitchen. i notice that it seemed to be all pretty old construction. it did not look like something that had been done in the last 40 years, 40 plus years maybe, so there has not been any recent work done on it to turn it into an illegal dwelling unit, which we sometimes do see, so it is a difficult one, and that is obviously why we are here, so i would be available for any questions. director goldstein: thank you. is there any public comment? seeing none, we are in rebuttal. do you have anything else to add? you have three minutes. >> i would just like to refer to the 1954 permit, if i could. it was in the packet submitted to you as exhibit 6. i believe that the problem was created, as you can see on the front page of building forms 3. bernardo geely was finding this permit and did not specify clearly enough what he was attempting to do. he may not have understood what the requirements of the process was. on the second page of that exhibit, you can see five and 97. i think that he is looking at the cleaning store as one family. i think he is characterizing that level of this house, this building. he is not talking about any work on the upper level with this application, and because he has addressed it as an hundred three russia, a number of stories, and a description of the work, partitioned in basement for two runs and a sink and three windows and a bathtub to complete the existing catherine yang. also, the installation of two of sweats and some lights. this is the completion of a dwelling unit. if you take a look at the second page of the assessor's building car, i am going to go to the overhead for a moment -- take a look at the assessors' building cards. in terms of what the assessor is calling it, it says 54, 3-room apartment in their rear. tile floor. pine floors. i am not really sure what else and says, but it is very clear that it is an alteration in 1954 in the rear. this is the assessor's records. this is what this family has owned since the early 1960's. it has been occupied as housing since probably before this record was made. i think it should continue to provide an housing resource for the people less able to afford high-end housing in san francisco. thank you. director goldstein thank you. -- director goldstein: thank you. any further comment? ok, if not, commissioners, the matter is submitted. vice president fung: i think i have made this statement before. in recent years, we have seen a slight reversal of a pattern we have seen a few decades ago, and that is that people want to march in their single-family units, because a single-family home has more financial value these days, but in response to a comment made earlier, the legalization of units was quite common at this board about 20 years ago. and i have not seen a reverse directory for quite awhile. that was a very common to all to try to indicate that there were additional units. i think that there is enough here to state that was initially three units, two residential and one commercial, and i would support the legalization. president hwang: do you want to make a motion? vice president fung: i will move to overturn the the department on the basis that the 1952 permit was used to legalize something that showed up in the previous documentation with the assessor's office and that it was representing the legalization of the third unit. secretary pacheco: we have a motion from commissioner fung to grant the appeal and overrule the denial and grant the permit, and i believe, commissioner fung, said you're finding was that the 1954 permit -- 1950 to permit was to legalize the second residential units. on that motion, by the vice president, to grant this appeal without finding, president hwangm commissioner hillism commissioner hurtado, the denial is overruled with that finding. >> thank you, commissioners. i would also like to thank mr. duffy. director goldstein: item number 7 has been withdrawn, so there is no further business this evening. president hwang: so we are adjourned. [gavel] >> the next time you take a muni bus or train, there could be new technology that could make it easier to get to your destination. many are taking a position of next bus technology now in use around the city. updated at regular intervals from the comfort of their home or workplace. next bus uses satellite technology and advanced computer modeling to track buses and trains, estimating are bought stocks with a high degree of accuracy. the bus and train our arrival information can be accessed from your computer and even on your cellular phone or personal digital assistant. knowing their arrival time of the bus allows riders the choice of waiting for it or perhaps doing some shopping locally or getting a cup of coffee. it also gives a greater sense that they can count on you to get to their destination on time. the next bus our arrival information is also transmitted to bus shelters around the city equipped with the next bus sign. riders are updated strictly about arrival times. to make this information available, muni has tested push to talk buttons at trial shelters. rider when pushes the button, the text is displayed -- when a rider pushes the button. >> the success of these tests led to the expansion of the program to all stations on the light rail and is part of the new shelter contract, push to talk will be installed. check out the new technology making your right easier every day >> i have 2 job titles. i'm manager of the tour program as well as i am the historyian of city hall. this building is multifaceted to say the very least it's a municipal building that operates the city and county of san francisco. this building was a dream that became a reality of a man by the name of james junior elected mayor of san francisco in 1912. he didn't have a city hall because it was destroyed in the earth wake of 1906. construction began in april of 1913. in december 1915, the building was complete. it opened it's doors in january 1916. >> it's a wonderful experience to come to a building built like this. the building is built as a palace. not for a king or queen. it's built for all people. this building is beautiful art. those are architecture at the time when city hall was built, san francisco had an enormous french population. therefore building a palace in the art tradition is not unusual. >> jimmie was an incredible individual he knew that san francisco had to regain it's place in the world. he decided to have the tallest dome built in the united states. it's now stands 307 feet 6 inches from the ground 40 feet taller than the united states capital. >> you could spend days going around the building and finding something new. the embellishment, the carvings, it represents commerce, navigation, all of the things that san francisco is famous for. >> the wood you see in the board of supervisor's chambers is oak and all hand carved on site. interesting thing about the oak is there isn't anymore in the entire world. the floors in china was cleard and never replanted. if you look up at the seceiling you would believe that's hand kof carved out of wood and it is a cast plaster sealing and the only spanish design in an arts building. there are no records about how many people worked on this building. the workman who worked on this building did not all speak the same language. and what happened was the person working next to the other person respected a skill a skill that was so wonderful that we have this masterpiece to show the world today.

Related Keywords

United States , China , Athens , Attikír , Greece , Russia , France , Spain , San Francisco , California , Spanish , French , Bernardo Geely , Catherine Yang ,