2009 2008 2007 2006 2005 2004 2003 2002 2001 2000 1999 BOARD OF APPEALS
CITY & COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO
MEETING MINUTES - WEDNESDAY, NOVEMBER 13, 2002
5:00 P.M., CITY HALL, ROOM 416, ONE DR. CARLTON B. GOODLETT PLACE
Present: Vice President Katherine Harrington, Commissioner Sabrina Saunders, Commissioner Douglas Shoemaker, and Commissioner Hisashi Sugaya. Absent: President Arnold Y. K. Chin.
Judith Boyajian, Deputy City Attorney for the City Attorney (DCA); Larry Badiner, Zoning Administrator, Planning Department; Laurence Kornfield, Chief Building Inspector, DBI; and Robert Feldman, Executive Secretary for the Board of Appeals; Official Court Reporter, Claudine Woeber.
(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.
(2)COMMISSIONERS COMMENTS & QUESTIONS:
(3)ADDENDUM ITEMS:
ITEM A: 706 Wisconsin Street. Letter from Christopher Parber & Maria Esther Gonzalez Parber, requesting that the Board take jurisdiction over Building Permit Application No(s). 2002/08/06/3220. Permit Holder(s): Tom McDonald. Project: remodel kitchen, bathrooms, repair rear deck.
Date Permit(s) Issued: August 6, 2002
Last Day to Appeal: August 21, 2002
Jurisdiction Request(s) Received: August 23, 2002
ACTION: Withdrawn by the requestors.
SPEAKERS: None.
ITEM B: 1479 - 3rd Avenue. Letter from Larry Badiner, Zoning Administrator, requesting rehearing of Appeal 01-196, Wydler vs. ZA, decided Jan. 30, 2002. Upon motion by Vice President McInerney, the Board voted 4-0-1 (Commissioner Saunders absent) to overrule the subject determination and to adopt the findings submitted by the appellant's attorney. Appellant: Aton Wydler. Determination: that use of the subject property as a 4-unit residential building is not permitted under the Planning Code, and is not considered to be a legal non-conforming use under Planning Code Sections 180 through 185.
ACTION: Upon motion by Commissioner Sugaya, the Board voted 3-0-2 (President Chin & Commissioner Saunders absent) to reschedule the matter to December 4, 2002.
(4)CONSENT ITEMS: With the consent of the Department of Building Inspection, the Board will proceed to a vote without testimony to reduce the penalty (investigation fee) to two times the regular fee as provided for in the Building Code. Without consent the Board will take testimony and then decide the appeal.
(4A) APPEAL NO. 02-146
|
ANNIE XU, Appellant(s)
DEPT. OF BUILDING INSPECTION,
Respondent
PLANNING DEPT. APPROVAL
|
[122 Tara Street.
[Appeal for refund of penalty imposed on [August 1, 2002, for work done without a permit.
[APPLICATION NO. 2002/07/09/0904.
[FOR HEARING TODAY.
|
ACTION: Upon motion by Commissioner Saunders, the Board voted 4-0-1 (President Chin absent) to reduce the subject penalty to 3 times the regular fee.
SPEAKERS: Annie Xu, Appellant explained why she feels the penalty is not justified since she had expected the contractors to obtain the necessary permits.
Leo McFadden, Senior Building Inspector, DBI, described what the district inspector had seen and said it appears the rear portion was built many years ago. No public comment for either side.
(4B) APPEAL NO. 02-147
|
JEFFREY GUNZENHAUSER, Appellant(s)
DEPT. OF BUILDING INSPECTION,
Respondent
PLANNING DEPT. APPROVAL
|
[1601 - 20th Avenue.
[Appeal for refund of penalty imposed on [August 1, 2002, for work done without a permit.
[APPLICATION NO. 2002/06/20/9494.
[FOR HEARING TODAY.
|
ACTION: Upon motion by Commissioner Saunders, the Board voted 4-0-1 (President Chin absent) to reduce the subject penalty to 2 times the regular fee.
(4C) APPEAL NO. 02-194
|
VICTOR UME-UKEJE
& ELIZABETH CONDON, Appellant(s)
DEPT. OF BUILDING INSPECTION,
Respondent
|
[2515-2519 Post Street.
[Appeal for refund of penalty imposed on Oct. 1, [2002, for work done without a permit.
[APPLICATION NO. 2002/09/09/5962.
[FOR HEARING TODAY.
|
ACTION: Upon motion by Commissioner Saunders, the Board voted 4-0-1 (President Chin absent) to reduce the subject penalty to 2 times the regular fee.
SPEAKERS: Elizabeth Condon, Co-Appellant, said the problem was that there was a mix-up between the general contractor and the roofing contractor who is from out-of-town and no one filed for a re-roofing permit. She said she got a permit the minute she understood it was necessary. Lawrence Kornfield explained the history of the roofing permit process and that an out-of-town contractor might be unfamiliar with the local roofing permit process.
No public comment for either side.
(5) APPEAL NO. 01-213
|
MICAELA LEZCANO, Appellant(s)
DEPT. OF PUBLIC WORKS, Respondent
|
[3560-3566 - 20th Street.
[Denial on October 25, 2001, of Permit to [Remove Two Trees (without replacement).
[ORDER NO(S). 173,215 & 173,232
[ORIGINAL DECISION ON FEB. 6, 2002 TO [UPHOLD DENIAL.
[REHEARING GRANTED JUNE 19, 2002.
[FOR REHEARING TODAY.
|
ACTION: Upon motion by Commissioner Saunders, the Board voted 4-0-1 (President Chin absent) to overrule the denial with respect to the fichus, on condition that the fichus be replaced with a smaller species, to be selected from a list of types furnished by DPW from which appellant is to choose one.
SPEAKERS: Tony Walcott, Urban Forester with DPW, explained that the Department opposed removal of the two trees because they were both young and in good condition. The larger one is a magnolia and the smaller a fichus. Amalia Lezcano, representing her mother, the Appellant, agreed that the trees are healthy but alleged that they are used by drug dealers to stash drugs and guns and create a serious criminal hazard for the neighborhood. She described the substantial neighborhood support for the appeal. Micaela Lezcano, Appellant, repeated her daughter's arguments for her appeal.
No public comment for either side.
(6) APPEAL NO. 02-042
|
CALVIN LEE, Appellant(s)
ZONING ADMINISTRATOR, Respondent
|
[344 Taraval Street.
[Appealing a Notice of Violation dated Feb. 26, [2002, addressed to Calvin Lee, that the 2nd [floor residential dwelling unit has been [converted to commercial use as additional [dental office space and storage without the [required conditional use (CU) authorization.
[PUBLIC TESTIMONY HEARD JUNE 12, 2002.
[FOR FURTHER CONSIDERATION TODAY.
|
ACTION: Upon motion by Commissioner Sugaya, the Board voted 3-0-2 (President Chin & Commissioner Saunders absent) to reschedule the matter to the Indefinite Calendar / Call of the Chair.
(7) APPEAL NO. 02-063
|
ERIC YOUNG
dba "SF BATTLE ZONE", Appellant(s)
ZONING ADMINISTRATOR, Respondent
|
[1968 Powell Street (583 Lombard Street).
[Appealing a Notice of Violation dated March 26, [2002, addressed to Gan Woo Wong, that the [small grocery store at the subject property has [been converted into an internet café without [benefit of a permit, in violation of Planning Code [§ 722.48 which requires conditional use (CU) [authorization for "Other Entertainment Uses" in [the North Beach Neighborhood Commercial [Zoning District.
[FOR HEARING TODAY.
|
ACTION: Upon motion by Commissioner Sugaya, the Board voted 1-3-1 (Commissioner Shoemaker, Vice President Harrington & Commissioner Saunders dissented, President Chin absent) to uphold the subject notice of violation. Afterwards, upon motion by Vice President Harrington, the Board voted 3-1-1 (Commissioner Sugaya dissented, President Chin absent) to rescind the previous vote and continue the matter to Feb. 26, 2003.
SPEAKERS: Lawrence Badinger, ZA, explained that the Department again has an enforcement division to enforce the Planning Code. Here it is a question of whether the subject use is allowed by the Code without conditional use authorization of the Planning Commission and whether the complete shop comes within the definition of a mechanical amusement device arcade with no more than ten machines or games. The Department can't differentiate between internet and game uses.
Eric Young, Appellant described his business and the support he has received from his neighbors. He said his is the only place in North Beach that tourists can use to check their e-mail and that this is a retail use, showing photos of the shop.
There was no public comment for either side.
(8) APPEAL NO. 02-070
|
MARY BAGGENSTOSS, Appellant(s)
DEPT. OF BUILDING INSPECTION,
Respondent
|
[1257B Dolores Street.
[Protesting the issuance on April 5, 2002, to [Anne Walzer, Permit to Alter a Building (1/4" [sheetrock attached to shearwalls, shelf and [structure to box in sloped cement foundation [along north wall, plywood floor to create level [floor).
[APPLICATION NO. 2002/04/05/3239.
[PUBLIC HEARING HELD & CLOSED JUNE 5, [2002. FURTHER TESTIMONY TAKEN [JUNE 26, 2002.
[FOR FURTHER CONSIDERATION TODAY.
|
ACTION: Upon motion by Commissioner Shoemaker, the Board voted 3-0-2 (President Chin, Commissioner Saunders absent) to uphold the subject permit.
(9) APPEAL NO. 02-082
|
COLLINS O'NEILL, Appellant(s)
DEPT. OF BUILDING INSPECTION,
Respondent
PLANNING DEPT. APPROVAL
|
[590 Lisbon Street.
[Protesting the issuance on May 9, 2002, to Matt [Householder, Site Permit to Alter a Building [(remove an existing rear extension, construct a [new two-story extension consisting of living [room, bedroom, bath and closet; includes new [deck and stairs to rear yard).
[APPLICATION NO. 2002/01/03/6243S.
[FOR HEARING TODAY.
|
ACTION: Upon motion by Commissioner Saunders, the Board voted 4-0-1 (President Chin absent) to uphold the subject permit.
SPEAKERS: Collins O'Neill, Appellant described how the proposed addition to his neighbor's house will extend beyond his house and will affect his light and air. Matt Householder, the Respondent, described the neighborhood support for his project and said that his home will project only three feet beyond the Appellant's house.
No public comments for either side.
(10) APPEAL NO. 02-084
|
PETER TETERIATNIKOV, Appellant(s)
POLICE DEPARTMENT, Respondent
|
[765 Market Street.
[Appealing the denial on May 3, 2002, of [Pushcart Peddler Permit.
[FOR HEARING TODAY.
|
ACTION: Upon motion by Vice President Harrington, the Board voted 4-0-1 (President Chin absent) to uphold the denial with a directive for the Police Department to assist the appellant in selecting a new site, preferably on Market Street.
SPEAKERS: Sgt. William Coggan for the S.F.P.D. explained the Police code regulations concerning push carts and how the application fails to meet the standards since it is within 60 feet of a business which also sells hot dogs. He said he doesn't know the history of the legislation. Officer Rose Meyers of the S.F.P.D. permit bureau explained that the applicant needs to find another spot that meets the Code criteria for approval. Jack Helsper, speaking for the Appellant said he knows the application doesn't meet the criteria but that the Appellant had a similar business in Russia and felt he can make a living here with a pushcart on Market Street. He feels that this is a question of equity and such a hard-working independent immigrant should be allowed to conduct the business he knows.
No public comment for either side.
There being no further business, Vice President Kathleen Harrington adjourned the meeting at 8:13 p.m.
_____________________________ _________________________________
Kathleen Harrington, Vice President Robert H. Feldman, Executive Secretary
Transcripts of these hearings can be obtained from Ms. Claudine Woeber, the Official Court Reporter, 883-7561.
