2009 2008 2007 2006 2005 2004 2003 2002 2001 2000 1999 MINUTES OF THE
REGULAR MEETING OF THE SAN FRANCISCO BOARD OF APPEALS
WEDNESDAY, FEBRUARY 9, 2000
5:30 P.M., CITY HALL, ROOM 416
1 DR. CARLTON B. GOODLETT PLACE (FORMERLY 301 POLK STREET)
PRESENT: President Arnold Chin, Vice-President Sabrina Saunders, Commissioner Carole Cullum Commissioner Allam El Qadah, and Commissioner John McInerney, III.
Judith Boyajian, Deputy City Attorney; Larry Badiner, Chief of Neighborhood Planning, Planning Department; Laurence Kornfield, Chief Building Inspector, Department of Building Inspection; and
Robert H. Feldman, Executive Secretary, for the Board.
(1) PUBLIC COMMENT: At this time, members of the public may address the Board on items of interest to the public that are within the subject matter jurisdiction of the Board except agenda items. With respect to agenda items, your opportunity to address the Board will be afforded when the item is reached in the meeting with one exception. When the agenda item has already been reviewed in a public hearing at which members of the public were allowed to testify and the Board has closed the public hearing, your opportunity to address the Board must be exercised during the Public Comment portion of the calendar. Each member of the public may address the Board for up to three minutes. If it is demonstrated that comments by the public will exceed 15 minutes, the President may continue Public Comment to another time during the meeting.
SPEAKERS: 1. Alice Barkley reported to the Board that the permit holders in Appeal No. 98-212 for the property at 38 West Clay Street have not yet complied with the conditions imposed by the Board last summer and asked that the Board see that they were. 2. Laurence Kornfield, Chief Building Inspector, DBI, reported that he has attempted to reach the attorney for the permit holders without success and said he will report next week to the Board on the enforcement activity.
- COMMISSIONERS COMMENTS AND QUESTIONS.
SPEAKERS: President Chin thanked Commissioner McInerney for his efforts last year as Board President and presented him with a plaque from the Board in appreciation.
(3) APPEAL NO. 99-203
|
ARTHUR & COLLEEN GIOVARA, Appellants
vs.
ZONING ADMINISTRATOR, Respondent
|
[Determination dated December 9, 1999 [by the Zoning Administrator that upon [the termination of St. Anthony [Foundation’s lease (currently scheduled [for July 13, 2000) and the approval of a [new use for the property at 1055 and [1065-75 Pine Street, the Notice of [Special Restrictions, recorded June 14, [1982, restricting use to elderly housing [units for women, will be released by the [Planning Department.
[FOR HEARING TODAY.
|
ACTION: Upon motion by Commissioner El Qadah, the Board voted 5-0 to OVERRRULE the Zoning Administrator’s determination.
SPEAKERS: 1. Larry Badiner, Chief of Neighborhood Planning, PD, explained that the department had changed its position and now is willing to remove the Notice of Special Restrictions from the land records.
Items (4A) and (4B) shall be heard together
(4A) APPEAL NO. 98-052
|
WILFREDO MENDOZA, Appellant
vs.
DEPT. OF BUILDING INSPECTION, Respondent
PLANNING DEPARTMENT APPROVAL
|
[Protesting issuance on March 11, 1998, [to Wai Ming Luk, permit to Alter a [Building (upgrade electrical wiring, [replace window, install skylight, remodel [kitchen, insulate walls where accessible) [at 3647 - 23rd Street.
[APPLICATION NO. 9804149.
[FOR FURTHER HEARING TODAY.
|
ACTION: Upon motion by President Chin, the Board voted 5-0 to CONTINUE this matter to
February 16, 2000.
SPEAKERS: 1. Robert H. Feldman, Executive Secretary, reported that that he had a conference call with Alex Weyand, attorney for Mr. Luk, and with Raquel Fox, attorney for the Mendozas, at 4 p.m. and that Mr. Weyand had requested the three appeals be put over one week because he has just come down with the flu. Ms. Fox agreed to this request.
(4B) APPEAL NO. 98-127
|
WILFREDO MENDOZA, et al., Appellants
vs.
DEPT. OF BUILDING INSPECTION, Respondent
PLANNING DEPARTMENT APPROVAL
|
[Protesting issuance on July 1, 1998, to [Wai Ming Luk, permit to Alter a Building [(remove interior walls to convert two unit [building to single family dwelling) at [3647 - 23rd Street.
[APPLICATION NO. 9810383.
[FOR FURTHER HEARING TODAY.
|
ACTION: Upon motion by President Chin, the Board voted 5-0 to CONTINUE this matter to
February 16, 2000.
SPEAKERS: 1. Robert H. Feldman, Executive Secretary, reported that that he had a conference call with Alex Weyand, attorney for Mr. Luk, and with Raquel Fox, attorney for the Mendozas, at 4 p.m. and that Mr. Weyand had requested the three appeals be put over one week because he has just come down with the flu. Ms. Fox agreed to this request.
(5) APPEAL NO. 99-112
|
WAI MING & KWAN YUK M. LUK, Appellants
vs.
ZONING ADMINISTRATOR, Respondent
|
[Determinations of the Zoning Admin- [istrator dated June 25 and July 13, 1999 [that the laundromat business at 3647-49 [- 23rd Street is limited by Planning Code [Sections 182, 710.40 and 790.102(e) to [serve only the immediate neighborhood [with all washing and cleaning done [on-site and with all windows closed, with [compliance within 30 days or abatement [action to be pursued.
[FOR HEARING TODAY.
|
ACTION: Upon motion by President Chin, the Board voted 5-0 to CONTINUE this matter to
February 16, 2000.
SPEAKERS: 1. Robert H. Feldman, Executive Secretary, reported that that he had a conference call with Alex Weyand, attorney for Mr. Luk, and with Raquel Fox, attorney for the Mendozas, at 4 p.m. and that Mr. Weyand had requested the three appeals be put over one week because he has just come down with the flu. Ms. Fox agreed to this request.
(6) APPEAL NO. 99-158
|
KATHLEEN HOWELL, Appellant
vs.
DEPT. OF BUILDING INSPECTION, Respondent
PLANNING DEPARTMENT APPROVAL
|
[Protesting issuance on September 24, [1999, to Henry I. Prien, permit to Alter a [Building (remove illegal unit in north [garage) at 2140 Pacific Avenue.
[APPLICATION NO. 9912615.
[FOR HEARING TODAY.
|
ACTION: Upon motion by Commissioner McInerney, the Board voted 5-0 to OVERRULE the Department of Building Inspection and DENY the permit on CONDITION that the unit be occupied only by the appellant, on CONDITION that the life & fire safety violations be corrected, and on further CONDITION that the unit be removed altogether when the appellant vacates the premises.
SPEAKERS: 1. Laurence Kornfield, Chief Building Inspector, DBI, reported a site visit made the day of the hearing and his observations of the subject unit, which is less than the required minimum of 144 square feet in area. 2. Jeremy Paul, agent for appellant, described the support the appellant has received from other tenants and asked the Board to legalize the unit which is uniquely suited to the appellant’s lifestyle as a flight attendant. 3. Nubar Tashjian, attorney for permit holder, asked that the Board at least allow the tenant to remain, as she is a good tenant and often not there. He said if she is able to stay until she no longer needs it, that the City could take up the matter again. 4. Larry Badiner, Chief of Neighborhood Planning, PD, said that he had approved the permit for removal of the unit but that he has not done any research as to the legality of the unit.
(7) APPEAL NO. 99-199
|
TONY M. LO GIUDICE, Appellant
vs.
DEPT. OF BUILDING INSPECTION, Respondent
PLANNING DEPARTMENT APPROVAL
|
[Protesting issuance on December 8, [1999, to Rung Guo, permit to Alter a [Building (34’-4" rear horizontal addition) [at 438 Holyoke Street.
[APPLICATION NO. 9907598S.
[FOR HEARING TODAY.
|
ACTION: Upon motion by Vice-President Saunders, the Board voted 5-0 to GRANT the permit on CONDITION that the rear yard extension be reduced by 5 feet, to 29 feet 4 inches.
SPEAKERS: 1. Larry Badiner. Chief of Neighborhood Planning, PD, said that some revisions have been made to make the project more acceptable to the neighbors, but he welcomed a further reduction in the length of the addition. 2. Ronald Parshall, agent for the appellant, asked those in support of the appeal to stand and ten people in the audience rose; he said that he was not notified of the discretionary review hearing and that the minor revisions made to the plans would not have a significant effect on the neighbor affected by sunlight blockage; he asked the Board to correct the mistake made by Planning in approving this project. 3. Walter Wong, agent for permit holder, said that no neighbor had asked for discretionary review and that the permit was not issued in error, but was proper; he also said that cutting off more than 5 feet off the addition would create a hardship for the permit holder. 4. Patrice Fambrini, agent for permit holder, described the support for the permit holder from some neighbors, including a retraction of opposition by one. 5. Betty Parshall, in support of appellant, questioned the process that had approved the permit. 6. Alice Barkley, in support of permit holder, said it was difficult for a family with children to live in houses of 38 feet in length as are the two adjacent homes; the project allows a 40 foot rear yard back to back with another 40 foot rear yard, at total of 80 feet which is like the width of Harrison Street at 82 feet between the buildings.
(8) APPEAL NO . V99-196
|
LAURA ARIAS, Appellant
vs.
ZONING ADMINISTRATOR, Respondent
|
[Decision by the Zoning Administrator [dated December 2, 1999, denying a [front yard variance (construction of a [solarium at the roof of the garage which [exists in the required 15’ front setback) [at 380 Laidley Street.
[VARIANCE CASE NO. 99.497V.
[FOR HEARING TODAY.
|
ACTION: Upon motion by Commissioner Cullum, the Board voted 5-0 to UPHOLD the Zoning Administrator and DENY the variance.
SPEAKERS: 1. Larry Badiner, Chief of Neighborhood Planning, PD, explained how the five requirements for a variance had not been met. 2. Jeremy Paul, agent for appellant, explained that the proposed solarium was needed to cure the leaking roof deck on which it is proposed to be built, and he described the diversity of the frontages and facades on Laidley Street. 3. Timothy Lewis, in support of appellant, explained that he lives across the street and supports the project as an improvement in the looks of the building.
(9) APPEAL NO. 99-188
|
SAN FRANCISCO FOOD BANK, Appellant
vs.
DEPT. OF BUILDING INSPECTION, Respondent
PLANNING DEPARTMENT APRPOVAL
|
[Protesting issuance on November 13, [1999, to Brendan Quinlan, permit to [Erect a Building (16 live/work units) at [1000 Pennsylvania Avenue.
[APPLICATION NO. 9825933S.
[FOR HEARING TODAY.
|
ACTION: Upon motion by President Chin, the Board voted 4-0 to RECUSE Commissioner McInerney, who left the hearing room at 7:16 p.m. After testimony, upon motion by Commissioner El Qadah, the Board voted 3-1 (Commissioner Cullum dissenting) to GRANT the permit on CONDITION that the Notice of Special Restrictions have a 20 point bold type face and requirement for printing of initials in certain areas concerning assumption of risk, and on further CONDITION that the Notice of Special Restrictions be filed with the Police and Health Departments, with FINDINGS as adopted by the Planning Commission during its Discretionary Review hearing; 4 votes being necessary to impose conditions on a permit, and 3 votes being necessary to adopt findings, the permit is GRANTED with NO CONDITIONS, with FINDINGS as adopted by the Planning Commission during its Discretionary Review hearing.
SPEAKERS: 1. Jose Allen, attorney for appellant, explained the Food Bank’s concerns about the proposed live-work building next door. He described the charities which benefit from the Food Bank program and the bad odors created from their produce dumpster which will irritate occupants of the units being created, and the costs that will be incurred by the Food Bank defending itself and the threat to the many beneficiaries of the Food Bank posed by such complaints. 2. Larry Badiner, Chief of Neighborhood Planning, PD, urged support for the project which the Planning Commission would not take under Discretionary Review after hearing the Food Bank’s testimony; he also explained that this a pipeline project which will be a buffer between the Food Bank and its surrounding residential neighbors. 3. James Reuben, attorney for permit holder, said that the permit was applied for before the Industrial Protection Zones (IPZ) were created in 1999; he also said that the lot had been vacant for four years before his client bought it; he also described the thoroughness of the Notice of Special Restrictions that will be filed and offered to revise it to meet the Board’s usual standards. 4. Mary Belknap, Operations Director for Children and Family Services at Catholic Charities, explained her three arguments against the project: a) bank will need room to grow, b) problems with new occupants next door will drain their limited resources, and c) her group joins all the others in opposing this project in the IPZ. 5. Chris Moore explained how his group relies on the Bank for food for its tenants, including disabled, seniors, the terminally ill, a population that is growing. 6. Gail Priestly of St. Anthony’s Foundation said her group received $1.5 million worth of food from the Bank and that these two uses were not a good match since the live-work units will generate complaints. 7. Sandra Vanderpool of Catholic Charities residential program said she has gotten food for ten years from the Bank to feed 50 young people and others in the program and that complaints about the Bank are guaranteed no matter how good the NSR is. 8. Reverend Harry Chuck, Executive Director of Cameron House, said the project will severely impact the Bank and food for many families will be jeopardized from the only facility of its kind in the City. 9. Major Robin Hu of the Salvation Army said the Bank has distributed 12 million tons of food to the needy and asked the Board to be compassionate. 10. Daniel Lyon said he owns property near the Food Bank, that they are not bad neighbors, and that more residential units will be good for the neighborhood. 11. Mal Rogers showed pictures of supermarkets in the Sunset with dumpsters along side and said that the Bank is like a supermarket and not remarkable nor incompatible with live-work units. 12. Redmond Lyons said he was happy that the Bank went in and that their trucks were no problem for the area; he also said that he did a similar building on Illinois near the cement works and that there hasn’t been any problems there. 13. Mack Burton said he lives on Potrero Hill and it is a shame to see people pick up free food; he also feels it is time for people to get jobs and off welfare, and that 50 people will be employed by this project. 14. Randy Allison said he lives nearby and said the subject lot was a junkyard for several years and now will finally look good with a live-work building on it. 15. Alice Barkley, attorney for adjacent property owner John Protouty, described the interim controls, the negative declaration done for the controls and that the City is on target for approving about 500 live-work units a year as originally planned for. 16. Joe O’Donoghue of the Residential Builders Association explained that his group had submitted a brief in support of this project and he objected to being demonized.
There being no further business, President Chin adjourned the meeting at 9:18 p.m.
_________________________________
Arnold Chin, President
_________________________________
Robert H. Feldman
Executive Secretary
Transcripts of these hearings can be obtained directly from Annette Snyder, the Official Court Reporter, (415) 362-5991.
