2009 2008 2007 2006 2005 2004 2003 2002 2001 2000 1999 BOARD OF APPEALS
CITY & COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO
MEETING MINUTES - WEDNESDAY, MARCH 24, 2004
5:00 P.M., CITY HALL, ROOM 416, ONE DR. CARLTON B. GOODLETT PLACE
PRESENT: President Kathleen Harrington, Vice President Hisashi Sugaya, Commissioner Arnold Chin, Commissioner Sabrina Saunders, and Commissioner Douglas Shoemaker.
Catharine Barnes, Deputy City Attorney, Office of the City Attorney (DCA OCA); Jonas Ionin, Senior Planner, Planning Departmnet (SP, PD); Laurence Kornfield, Chief Building Inspector, Dept. of Building Inspection (CBI DBI); Naomi Little, Executive Director, Taxi Commission (ED, TC); Robert Feldman, Executive Secretary, and Victor Pacheco, Legal Assistant, for the Board; and Claudine Woeber, Official Court Reporter.
(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: None.
(2) COMMISSIONERS COMMENTS & QUESTIONS:
SPEAKERS: None.
(3) ADDENDUM ITEMS:
(3A) JURISDICTION REQUEST TO ALLOW LATE FILING OF APPEAL:
Subject property at 239 Greenwich St; Permit issued on Oct. 6, 2003
Last day to appeal was Oct. 21, 2003; Jurisdiction request received on Dec. 3, 2003
|
Letter from John Cowen, asking that the Board take jurisdiction over Building Permit Application No(s). 2003/10/06/6615. Project: on single family house, stair way, 4’ wide, not more than 30” above grade, on deeded and recorded easement. Permit Holder(s): Terrance Forgette.
|
ACTION: Upon motion by Commissioner Chin, the Board voted 5-0 to deny the jurisdiction request.
SPEAKERS: John Cowen, requestor, asked the Board to let him file a late appeal because there had been no notice of the permit’s issuance. Craig Nikitas, AZA, explained that the permit had been issued over-the –counter in error and that a permit is required for this project because the property is in the Telegraph Hill Historic District, and a Certificate of Appropriateness is also required; he supported the request. Terrance Forgette, permit holder, explained the history of his ownership and described the steps he built which are modeled on the Filbert Street steps. Laurence Kornfield, CBI, DBI, said his department can suspend the permit if a Certificate of Appropriateness is required. Public comment: Joe Luttrell of THD explained why his group has not reacted to the project and described other construction on the property.
(3B) REHEARING REQUEST:
|
Letter Craig Nikitas, Acting Zoning Administrator, requesting rehearing of Appeal No(s). 03-192, decided Feb. 18, 2004. At that time, the Board voted 4-0-1 (Commissioner Saunders absent) to uphold the subject permit with the following condition(s): a) that there be no construction on the 2nd level of the garage; and b) that the exit from the bathroom to the roof deck be eliminated. Project: on single-family house, construct one floor above existing garage as computer room/home office. Appellant(s): Leticia & Leopoldo Redondo. Permit Holder(s): Javier Giron.
|
ACTION: Upon motion by Vice President Sugaya, the Board voted 5-0 to grant the rehearing request and to set the rehearing for March 31, 2004.
SPEAKERS: Craig Nikitas, AZA, explained the permit history and the effect of the Board ruling which imposes a condition on the front building only since there was no permit appealed for the rear building and no jurisdiction over it. Javier Giron, permit holder, asked the Board to deny the request. Leticia Redondo, appellant, said she is only concerned with the front building. Public comment: Michael Hutchison said he is only concerned with the condition on the front of the building.
(3C) JURISDICTION REQUEST TO ALLOW LATE FILING OF APPEAL:
Subject property at 65-67 Pearl Street; Permit issued on February 5, 2004
Last day to appeal was February 20, 2004; Jurisdiction request received on March 2, 2004
|
Letter from Brian Basinger, asking that the Board take jurisdiction over Building Permit Application No(s). 2004/02/05/5723. Project: on two-family house, install new garage according to attached drawings. Permit Holder(s): Jan Neufeld.
|
ACTION: Upon motion by President Harrington, the Board voted 5-0 to grant the jurisdiction request.
SPEAKERS: Brian Basinger, requestor, said he has AIDS and is being “Ellis Acted” out of his apartment; he said he applied for a block book notation (BBN) but was never notified of the issuance of the permit nor had the permit holder discussed the project with him or mailed him notice. Denise Leadbetter, attorney for permit holder, said that there is much work to be done and the project is construction of a garage. John Polland, agent for permit holder, said that he has never evicted anyone and does not know about the Ellis Act. Jonas Ionin, PD, said that no Section 311 notice is required because the project results in reducing the envelope but that the BBN should have resulted in notification, but may not have been entered until after the permit was reviewed.
ITEMS (4A) & (4B) SHALL BE HEARD TOGETHER:
(4A) APPEAL NO. V03-205
|
JOHN GLUGOSKI, Appellant(s)
vs.
ZONING ADMINISTRATOR, Respondent
|
1120-1122 Vallejo Street.
Protesting the granting on Dec. 23, 2003, to Susan Lee, Jennifer Cherk & Jay Capela, Rear Yard Variance (on 2-family building: construction of an enclosed pavilion on the roof of the existing 3-story building and the enclosure of two areas at the rear of the building that are currently unenclosed).
VARIANCE CASE NO. 2003.0476DV.
FOR HEARING TODAY.
|
(4B) APPEAL NO. V03-209
|
CATHERINE FERREIRA
& ANN FERREIRA, Appellant(s)
vs.
ZONING ADMINISTRATOR, Respondent
|
1120-1122 Vallejo Street.
Protesting the granting on Dec. 23, 2003, to Susan Lee, Jennifer Cherk & Jay Capela, Rear Yard Variance (on 2-family building: construction of an enclosed pavilion on the roof of the existing 3-story building and the enclosure of two areas at the rear of the building that are currently unenclosed).
VARIANCE CASE NO. 2003.0476DV.
FOR HEARING TODAY.
|
ACTION: Upon motion by Commissioner Sugaya, the Board voted 5-0 to uphold the variance with the following condition(s): a) that the north portion of the roof be sloped to allow for more sunlight into the adjacent backyard; and b) that the front (south) elevation be redesigned to reflect the solid to void ratio of buildings of a similar nature.
SPEAKERS: Jonis Ionin, PD, explained that the lot is extremely undersized but still a lot of record and is buildable. John Glugoski, appellant, said that the design is the issue since it is not in harmony with the neighborhood. Chris Moscone, attorney for appellants Catherine & Ann Ferreira, said that the variance should not have been granted because the project violates Section 188 of the Planning Code, that there is no hardship, and that discrepancies with the Planning Code shall be increased; he asked that conditions be imposed if it is upheld. Bruce Bonacker, architect for appellants, explained the proposed conditions which will preserve his clients’ visual access and reduce the compromise to their privacy. Jay Capela, co-variance holder, explained how the addition is needed for his growing family and that he has already made several design compromises to suit the neighbors, and that the project does fit into the neighborhood. Public comment: Francisco Centurion said while glass boxes are fine in other circumstances, they are out of character with Russian Hill. Cecilia Marihart read a letter to the Board from residents of 1807 Jones who said the variance holders had not acted in good faith. Karen Robertson read her husband’s letter to the Board which said that there were other solutions to the owners’ needs and that the compromises offered so far were not serious. Daniela Ballard read a statement and said that the appellants are open minded, but were not given timely accurate information about the project. Raj Tha spoke for Eric Holderman at 1809 Jones, and said that the process and plans had been manipulated to avoid Code standards. Ann Ferreira, co-appellant, said the appellants have presented reasonable alternatives that will protect neighbors. Catharine Barnes, DCA OCA, responded to Board questions about the variance process. Dart Cherk, architect for variance holders, said that this building was the first PUD in the City; he explained the effect of the proposed revisions on the project.
(5) APPEAL NO. 03-196
|
FRANCIS DAVID RYAN, Appellant(s)
vs.
DEPT. OF BUILDING INSPECTION, Respondent
PLANNING DEPT. APPROVAL
|
1018 Clayton Street.
Protesting the issuance on Sept. 22, 2003, to Gunther Dertz, Permit to Alter a Building (on single-family house: construct 7’ X 36” high one-hour fire rated parapet on roof at south side).
APPLICATION NO. 2003/09/22/5414.
JURISDICTION GRANTED 11/12/03.
PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED ON 1/28/04.
FOR FURTHER CONSIDERATION TODAY.
|
ACTION: Upon motion by Commissioner Chin, the Board voted 3-2 (Commissioner Shoemaker & Vice President Sugaya dissented) to uphold the subject permit.
SPEAKERS: Laurence Kornfield, CBI DBI, said he and Mr. McFadden made a site visit as requested by the Board and that in their view there is no imminent life safety hazards, and that while the parapet would not be allowed on a new building this one is permitted to remain. Gunther Dertz, permit holder, said this is not a spite wall and that the neighbor’s condition presents a hazard to him. Francis David Ryan, appellant, described his unsuccessful attempts to reach an agreement with the permit holder.
ITEMS (6A) & (6B) SHALL BE HEARD TOGETHER:
(6A) APPEAL NO. 03-197
|
ALL-CITY CONSTRUCTION CO., Appellant(s)
vs.
DEPT. OF BUILDING INSPECTION, Respondent
|
641 – 27th Avenue.
Appealing a Notice of Decision by Frank Chiu, Director of the Dept. of Building Inspection, dated Dec. 3, 2003, that an unlawful residential demolition has taken place at the subject property under Building Code §§ 103.3, 103.3.1 & 103.3.2, that BPA No. 2002/09/09/5995 is hereby revoked, and that a 5 year moratorium on the issuance of building permits is hereby imposed pursuant to Building Code § 103.3.1.
PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED ON 2/4/04.
FOR FURTHER CONSIDERATION TODAY.
|
(6B) APPEAL NO. 03-199
|
HOWARD & SUSIE WOO, Appellant(s)
vs.
DEPT. OF BUILDING INSPECTION, Respondent
|
641 – 27th Avenue.
Appealing a Notice of Decision by Frank Chiu, Director of the Dept. of Building Inspection, dated Dec. 3, 2003, that an unlawful residential demolition has taken place at the subject property under Building Code §§ 103.3, 103.3.1 & 103.3.2, that BPA No. 2002/09/09/5995 is hereby revoked, and that a 5 year moratorium on the issuance of building permits is hereby imposed pursuant to Building Code § 103.3.1.
PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED ON 2/4/04.
FOR FURTHER CONSIDERATION TODAY.
|
ACTION: Upon motion by Vice President Sugaya, the Board voted 4-0-1 (Commissioner Saunders absent) to continue the appeal to March 31, 2004, and for it to go first on the agenda.
SPEAKERS: Ken Harrington, Deputy Director of DBI, reviewed the case and the documents which have been presented to the Board, and answered Board questions. Joel Yodowitz, attorney for All City Construction, explained how the ordinance is confusing and difficult to understand and he said the unreported federal case referred to by the Department is not relevant here and his client had no intent to deceive anyone. Roger Meredith, attorney for appellants Howard and Susie Woo, said that the unreported case has no precedent value here, and could not be cited, and objects to the lack of due process for his clients. Neil Sofia, architect, said that DBI had ten months to review plans and should have pointed out any discrepancies if there were any. Public comment: Maria Sousa explained the benefits to builders of illegal demolitions. Joe O’Donoghue described reasons developers try to avoid the demolition permit process.
(7) APPEAL NO. 03-206
|
JOE LEUNG, Appellant(s)
vs.
TAXI COMMISSION, Respondent
|
Appealing the revocation on December 16, 2003, of a Driver of Public Passenger Vehicle for Hire Permit.
RESOLUTION NO. 2003-87.
FOR HEARING TODAY.
|
ACTION: Upon motion by Commissioner Sugaya, the Board voted 4-0-1 (Commissioner Saunders absent) to reschedule the appeal to April 28, 2004.
SPEAKERS: Sherry Gendelman, attorney for appellant, requested a rescheduling a night with a 5 member Board. Naomi Little, ED TC, did not object to the rescheduling request.
(8) APPEAL NO. 02-204
|
LEE & RUTH ANN SEWARD,
THOMAS & JODY ROBERTSON,
SYDNEY GOLDSTEIN, STEVE &
BRENDA BOTTUM, & RICK ELLIS, Appellant(s)
vs.
DEPT. OF BUILDING INSPECTION, Respondent
PLANNING DEPT. APPROVAL
|
2736 Pierce Street.
Protesting the issuance on October 7, 2002, to P.Q. & June Chin, Permit to Alter a Building (sun deck on top of existing roof, 42” high rail, 4X4 post secured to existing structure (roof)).
APPLICATION NO. 2002/10/07/8421.
FOR HEARING TODAY.
|
ACTION: Appeal withdrawn by the appellants.
ITEMS (9A) & (9B) SHALL BE HEARD TOGETHER:
(9A) APPEAL NO. 03-203
|
PAMELA DAY, Appellant(s)
vs.
DEPT. OF BUILDING INSPECTION, Respondent
PLANNING DEPT. APPROVAL
|
334-336 – 6th Street.
Protesting the issuance on Dec. 5, 2003, to 334-336 – 6th Street Associates LLC, Permit to Demolish a Building (2-story office/warehouse with 3000sf of ground floor area).
APPLICATION NO. 2002/09/20/7085.
FOR HEARING TODAY.
|
(9B) APPEAL NO. 03-204
|
PAMELA DAY, Appellant(s)
vs.
DEPT. OF BUILDING INSPECTION, Respondent
PLANNING DEPT. APPROVAL
|
334-336 – 6th Street.
Protesting the issuance on Dec. 5, 2003, to 334-336 – 6th Street Associates LLC, Permit to Erect a Building (5-story, 8-unit residential building with 3000sf of ground floor area).
APPLICATION NO. 2002/09/20/7092.
FOR HEARING TODAY.
|
ACTION: Upon motion by Vice President Harrington, the Board voted 4-0-1 (Commissioner Saunders absent) to uphold the subject permit.
SPEAKERS: Leyla Farah said she is part of the appellant’s group but the appellant is not present and she herself is not speaking for the appellant; she thinks the appeal may be a waste of time. Bruce Baumann, agent for permit holder, described his discussions with the appellant. Joe O’Donoghue said the appellant is a broker and that the association is not aware of the facts of the project, and that the appellant keeps raising new issues. No public comment.
(10) APPEAL NO. 04-009
|
RACHEL KOVAR, Appellant(s)
vs.
ZONING ADMINISTRATOR, Respondent
|
2120 Fillmore Street #A.
Appealing a Police Permit Zoning Referral, dated January 20, 2004, addressed to Rachel Kovar, that the application for personal service use (fortune-telling) cannot be approved because such a use is not permitted within a residential dwelling unit in the Fillmore Neighborhood Commercial District under Planning Code § 204.1.
FOR HEARING TODAY.
|
ACTION: Upon motion by Commissioner Chin, the Board voted 4-0-1 (Commissioner Saunders absent) to overrule the Zoning Administrator’s Police Permit Referral, with the following findings: a) that Planning Code Section 402.1(h) applies; b) that the appellant is a professional as defined under the Planning Code, and with the following condition: a) that there be no advertising in the front windows.
SPEAKERS: Jeff Rosen, attorney for appellant, said this case is an unintended consequence of the recent ordinance and asked the Board to allow his client to remain in business and that no neighbors oppose the appeal. Jonas Ionin, PD, explained how the Code has been interpreted traditionally and that this occupation can be allowed as an accessory use like a profession. Public comment: Ronald Hobbs spoke in favor of the appellant’s appeal.
There being no further business, President Harrington adjourned the meeting at 9:27 p.m.
______________________________ _________________________________
Kathleen Harrington, President Robert H. Feldman, Executive Secretary
Transcripts of these hearings can be obtained from Ms. Claudine Woeber, the Official Court Reporter, 506-0430.
