Owners we know this operator and hes on the permit so the fact he had his stepdaughter sign the operation at the hearing fwrts d b h he wasnt an applicant and it was issued. To both mr. Mendez and at that time, hearing they referred to it as a Family Business it was not a Family Business it was about a nonprofit that helped patient were happy to answer our esquires questions if you have questions about the litigation all of the history behind it but i dont think you need to go there when he was entrusted with the permittee stole the pg e so if you have any questions, ill be happy to answer them okay. We can hear if the permit holder now. Permit holder first then the department. The permit holder will speak first then the department thank you. Good evening. Im paul, i represent the permit holder whos present. Im not going to address the points in my brief i assume the panel has read it i want to add one point there are a Vantage Point in the presentation this evening. A lot of misty and
Department now. Good evening, commissioners madam chair im on behalf of the respondent of department of health so this started with the directors hearing so that means the director of health has designated that essentially the Health Officer of the department to hear those permit appeal matters and thats because article 33 is in the health code this is the health issue. And the remits in article 33 are pretty state your name for the record and the majority of those concerns Health Issues for example, does the dispensary operate a growth on site do they intend to allow smoking within the facility do they summit American People accurate security plan those are all Health Related concerned that can be traced back to the state law the com pack at act you have the director that heard in this matter from both appellant here today as well as the party of interest youve heard from the members of the public he had before him the paperwork submitted by ms. Michelle who was seeking to become the
And its our good faith intent to remove this from the housing use its appropriated under the circumstances so its your clients position if theres a debate to the Planning Department its required is it your appellants position not required. Its my position now, its not determined given the testimony given here today particularly by the representatives of the city its not been determined whether or not a further permit is needed if the city says yes, thats exactly what well do. Okay. Thank you thank you. Anything further from the department. Mr. Duffy ill say the attorney wanted to hear from the city a permit will be required ill say yes, a Building Permit is required we see the documents where the area has been remodeled and i dont see any permits so weve got that issue and the plumbing permit we need a Building Permit in my opinion to show what the true intent is in the area and if you want to keep it as a legal use or whatever you need a Building Permit to show that and that will fore
October perhaps the second or third meeting in the month. Perhaps the 15th. Its easy for chris to say and why not do it a little bit sooner october 8th. Okay. Im not sure whos motion. Okay. Ill make the motion to continue to october 8th for the housing inspectors to continue and conclude its investigation as well as the department of the building inspection to explore whether or not the permit at issue should have a building permit. Would you want any additional briefing . No no. She wants lots. Im leaving this for everyone else mr. Pacheco. We have a motion then from commissioner hwang to continue this to octobers 8 any Public Comment . 2014 the public hearing has been held to allow the dbi time to conclude its analysis. On that motion and no additional briefing is allowed. Commissioner fung. No. The Vice President is absent. Commissioner president lazarus. Commissioner honda. Thank you. The vote is 3 to one the matter is continued actually october 8th well take a 5 minute break. Welc
Whether or not in some circumstances a permit is necessary to remove a unit period, however, if a permanent is do required then to get the necessary permits removing the unit pursuant to a plumbing unit and its our good faith intent to remove this from the housing use its appropriated under the circumstances so its your clients position if theres a debate to the Planning Department its required is it your appellants position not required. Its my position now, its not determined given the testimony given here today particularly by the representatives of the city its not been determined whether or not a further permit is needed if the city says yes, thats exactly what well do. Okay. Thank you thank you. Anything further from the department. Mr. Duffy ill say the attorney wanted to hear from the city a permit will be required ill say yes, a Building Permit is required we see the documents where the area has been remodeled and i dont see any permits so weve got that issue and the plumbing