Meeting Information

PRESENT: President Arnold Chin, Commissioners Carole Cullum, Allam El Qadah, and John McInerney.

Judith Boyajian, Deputy City Attorney (DCA); Lawrence Badiner, Zoning Administrator (ZA); Laurence Kornfield, Chief Building Inspector, Department of Building Inspection (CBI, DBI); and Robert Feldman, Executive Secretary.

ABSENT: Vice President Sabrina Saunders.

Easteller Bruihl, the Official Court Reporter, swore in all those who intended to testify during the meeting.

SPEAKERS: None.

SPEAKERS: President Chin requested that the staff schedule for the March 21, 2001 meeting an amendment to the Board’s Rules for public hearing, consideration and adoption to allow the President to appoint an acting vice president for the period the vice president is incapacitated and absent and unable to perform the duties of the office.

Commissioner McInerney said he was in agreement with this request.

ACTION: WITHDRAWN prior to hearing.

The Court reporter swore in those who missed the initial swearing in at the beginning of the meeting.

ACTION: After discussion, upon motion by Commissioner McInerney, the Board voted 2-2 (President Chin and Commissioner El Qadah dissented) to UPHOLD the Zoning Administrator. Four votes are needed to overrule and the determination is UPHELD.

SPEAKERS: 1. Lawrence Badiner (ZA), explained his determination and the Code provisions concerning non-conforming uses, limited commercial uses, the zoning of the property, and the abandonment provisions and the evidence he based his determination on. 2. William Balin, attorney for appellant, cited a recent court decision which said an ABC license issued prior to a change in zoning remained in effect in spite of the zoning regulations; and that the case supported a Board decision in favor of his client. He refuted arguments of the ZA and described the history of the litigation between his client and the City. 3. President Chin said that rumors that he had a financial interest in the property were untrue and he had none. Public Comment in support of ZA: 4. Winston Montgomery apologized to President Chin for the unfounded rumor that was going around the neighborhood. He then described the criminal activities he associated with the subject store. 5. Captain James Dudley of the SFPD said he had Chief Lau’s support in opposing alcoholic beverage sales at this address. 6. Debra Kessler asked for a show of hands in the audience of those in support of the ZA. Fifteen to twenty went up. She explained the history of the property before the Board. She said the store has been locked and vacant for six years. 7. Robert Moxley described the evidence of abandonment of this use and the permit history for it. 8. Josephine Leggett, a photographer showed pictures of the property to prove its dilapidation and the presence of scaffolding around it for many months which blocked the sidewalk and added the property is a magnet for garbage. 9. Ken Niger said he goes by the property every day and asked why can’t the owners clean up the mess there. 10. Scott Perkins said he lives to the north across Elm Street on the top floor and can see stray cats on top of the garage, the only activity he observed on the property, with nothing done to the property for the past 19 months. 11. Savannah Tomms said she has lived in the area since the 1970’s and remembers when Elizabeth Jamerson ran it. She said it had a limited stock and was good for milk and bread. She described the high crime rate there and said the appellant had been forced to paint the building. 12. Brian Dickey said he has lived a block east on Golden Gate Avenue for the last nine years. He felt the store would cause double parking on Golden Gate and Scott Street which would be hazardous especially with the extreme grade down Golden Gate. He said the Western Addition needs care and attention. 13. Nonnie Richards said she passes the site several times a day and nothing was done to the property until recently, just a quickie paint job. 14. Gordon Husty said he is a land use expert and a neighbor and that a liquor/beer store would not be the highest and best use of the property. He said a nearby property with a small two-unit residential building recently sold for $1.4 million and this property should be a two-unit also although it has more square footage than the nearby one. 15. Alice Lane, conservator of the appellant, in rebuttal, argued that the NCU store has not been abandoned and that the neighbors were responsible for the garbage that accumulates on the site and put the graffiti there, too. She said she could not get loans to repair the property because she is black. 16. Rafael Torres-Gil, senior building inspector, described the scaffolding regulations enforced by DPW and said they were a temporary use during construction. There was no public comment in support of the appellant.

ACTION: Upon motion by President Chin, the Board voted 4-0 to RESCHEDULE the matter to May 2, 2001 at the written request of Alice Barkley, attorney for appellants.

ACTION: After discussion, upon motion by Commissioner El Qadah, the Board voted 4-0 to OVERRULE the department and the penalties imposed on the appellant by DBI.

SPEAKERS: 1. Laurence Kornfield (CBI, DBI), explained the unlawful demolition provisions of the Building Code Section 103.3 and how the present case was deemed to fall under them. 2. Jeremy Paul, consultant to the appellant, explained how the appellant had followed the approved plans exactly under the eye of the district inspector who did not alert him to the possibility of the project being deemed an unlawful demolition and how the department was now training their field inspectors how to give notice of the Code provisions to contractors before they reach a stage of an alteration that may be called an unlawful demolition without a demolition permit being obtained in addition to the already approved alteration permits. He showed how the department had given the appellant discretion to retain or replace elements of the job as his judgment directed, with the job card signed off by the inspector to the day before the project was deemed an unlawful demolition. He described the new guidelines developed by the department for the inspectors to guide them in dealing with the problems of enforcement of the Code provisions which are not clear and thorough. Public Comment for Appellant: 3. Don Pardol, lives next door and said the appellant is making a contribution to the neighborhood and the work so far was excellent. 4. Alan Louie from across the street said he supported the appellant because the design of the project fits the neighborhood character and it is the same size as the building next door, unlike those developers who try to max-out the envelope on a site; like the monster house nearby. Here the infraction is only a technical violation. No Public Comment for the Department.

ACTION: After discussion, upon motion by Commissioner McInerney, the Board voted 4-0 to OVERRULE the department and DENY the permit.

SPEAKER: Denise Schrivner, representative for appellant, said the permit holder was not in the audience. No Public Comment for appellant or for permit holder.

There being no further business, President Chin adjourned the meeting at 7:55 p.m.

___________________________________