2009 2008 2007 2006 2005 2004 2003 2002 2001 2000 1999 BOARD OF APPEALS
CITY & COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO
MEETING MINUTES - WEDNESDAY, NOVEMBER 12, 2003
5:00 P.M., CITY HALL, ROOM 416, ONE DR. CARLTON B. GOODLETT PLACE
PRESENT: President Arnold Chin Vice President Kathleen Harrington, Commissioner Douglas Shoemaker, and Commissioner Hisashi Sugaya.
ABSENT: Commissioner Sabrina Saunders.
Catharine Barnes, Deputy City Attorney (DCA); Craig Nikitis, for the Planning Dept. (PD) & the Zoning Administrator (ZA); Laurence Kornfield, Chief Building Inspector, Dept. of Building Inspection (CBI DBI); Jacob Szeto, Dept. of Public Works Bureau of Street Use & Mapping; Executive Secretary Robert Feldman, 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: Douglas Goldman complained of the planning Department’s failure to impose Board conditions on the alteration permit for 2518 Union Street. Mark Schlesinger supported Mr. Goldman’s argument. Patricia Vaughey spoke in support of Mr. Cabi’s right to proceed with the project. David Cincotta, Mr. Cabi’s attorney, said the plans approved by Planning for 2518 Union Street are appropriate and meet the Board’s conditions. Barry Taranto spoke in support of the Taxi Commission and its revocation of medallions for Prop K non-compliance.
(2) COMMISSIONERS COMMENTS & QUESTIONS:
SPEAKERS: None.
(3) ADDENDUM ITEMS:
(3A) REHEARING REQUEST:
2776 Mission Street; Appeal No(s). 03-013; Low vs. DBI, Planning Dept. Disapproval
|
Letter from Dan Sullivan, Agent for Appellant Dennis Low, requesting a rehearing of Appeal No(s). 03-013, decided May 21, 2003. At that time, upon motion by Commissioner Shoemaker, the Board voted 2-3 (President Chin, Vice President Harrington & Commissioner Saunders dissented) to uphold the denial of the subject permit. Four votes being required under Charter § 4.106 to overturn any departmental action, the motion passed and the denial of the subject permit was upheld. Project: abate Notice of Violation No. 200232430; install front roll up gate; remove existing wall to replace existing 2’6” door with a new 3’0” door and 4X8 header with accessible door hardware; the gate is for security purposes, thus closed grill; retail open from 9am to 9pm.
|
ACTION: Upon motion by Commissioner Shoemaker, the Board voted 4-0-1 (Commissioner Saunders absent) to reschedule the request to Dec. 3, 2003.
SPEAKERS: Dan Sullivan, agent for appellant, requested the rescheduling due to the lack of a five member Board. Craig Nikitas, PD, said he had no objection to the rescheduling.
(3B) REHEARING REQUEST:
Appeal No(s). 02-030; 50 – 8th Street; Foster Media vs. Zoning Administrator
|
Letter from Christopher Moscone, agent for Foster Media, Appellant, requesting rehearing of Appeal No(s). 02-030, decided June 19, 2002. Upon motion by Vice President McInerney, the Board voted 2-3 (Commissioner Cullum, Commissioner Saunders & Commissioner El Qadah dissented) to uphold the subject determination. Four votes being necessary to overturn any departmental action under Charter § 4.106, the motion passed and the subject determination was upheld. Determination: that the subject Building Permit Application for a general advertising sign is disapproved because the subject property is visible from, and located within 200 feet of the Market Street Special Sign District.
|
ACTION: Upon motion by President Chin, the Board voted 3-0-2 (Commissioners Shoemaker & Saunders absent) to reschedule the request to Jan. 14, 2004 at the written request of the parties.
SPEAKERS: None.
(3C) REHEARING REQUEST:
Appeal No(s). 03-092; NW Corner of Haight & Masonic; Olson vs. DPW BSM
|
Letter from Carl Olson, appellant, requesting rehearing of Appeal No(s). 03-092, decided October 8th, 2003. At that time, upon motion by Commissioner Saunders, the Board voted 4-1 (Vice President Harrington dissented) to uphold the subject permit on condition that the Dept. of Public Works Bureau of Street-Use & Mapping (DPW BSM) consider moving the site closer to the corner. Permit Type: automatic public toilet.
|
ACTION: Upon motion by Commissioner Shoemaker, the Board voted 3-1-1 (Vice President Harrington dissented, Commissioner Saunders absent) to deny the rehearing request.
SPEAKERS: Carl Olson, appellant, asked the Board to grant a rehearing so he can present new evidence. No public comment.
(3D) REHEARING REQUEST:
Appeal No(s). 03-108 & 03-116; 701 Lombard Street; Telegraph Hill Dwellers vs. ZA
|
Letter from Paul Scott, President of Telegraph Hill Dwellers, appellant, requesting rehearing of Appeal No(s). 03-108 & 03-116, decided October 8th, 2003. At that time, upon motion by President Chin, the Board voted 5-0 to uphold the subject determination with negative declaration findings as read into the record by President Chin, and 5-0 to uphold the subject variance. Determination: that the Mason Street frontage shall be used for measurement of height per Planning Code § 102.12(d), that a minimum of 2 building steps is required for measurement purposes per Planning Code § 260(a)(3), and that the rear of the lot for height measurement is located where the Lombard Street & Columbus Avenue frontages converge. Variance Type: Usable Open Space Variance (demolish existing parking lot and construct a new four-story mixed-use building with nine residential units, two small ground floor retail spaces at the Columbus Avenue building corners, and nine off-street parking spaces at the ground floor). Subject Property Owner(s): Martin Coyne & Brian O’Flynn.
|
ACTION: Upon motion by Vice President Harrington, the Board voted 2-2-1 (Commissioners Shoemaker & Sugaya dissented, Commissioner Saunders absent) to deny the rehearing request. Four votes being required to grant a rehearing request, the subject request was denied.
SPEAKERS: Gerry Crowley, agent for appellant, asked the Board to grant a rehearing. Jim Reuben, attorney for variance/determination holder(s), asked the Board to deny the request. No public comment.
(3E) JURISDICTION REQUEST TO ALLOW LATE FILING OF APPEAL:
1524 Waller Street; Permit issued on August 20, 2003
Last day to appeal was Sept. 3, 2003; Jurisdiction request received Oct. 21, 2003
|
Letter from Proceso Emperio, requestor(s), asking that the Board take jurisdiction over Building Permit Application No(s). 2003/08/20/2628. Project: rebuild existing rotten egress stairs at rear in kind per plans. Permit Holder(s): Cecilia Bolusan.
|
ACTION: Upon motion by President Chin, the Board voted 4-0-1 (Commissioner Saunders absent) to deny the jurisdiction request.
SPEAKERS: Proceso Emperio, requestor, asked the Board to grant him a new 15-day appeal period. Jerome Bolusan, agent for permit holder, asked the Board to deny the request for jurisdiction.
(3F) REHEARING REQUEST:
Taxi Medallion No(s). 129; Appeal No(s). 02-020; Adams vs. Taxi Commission
|
Letter from John Feldmann III, Attorney for David Adams, Appellant(s), requesting rehearing of Appeal No(s). 02-020, decided June 25, 2003. At that time, upon motion by Commissioner Saunders, the Board voted 3-2 (Commissioners Shoemaker & Sugaya dissented) to overrule the Taxi Commission and add the appellant’s name to the subject medallion. Four votes being required under Charter § 4.106 to overturn or modify a departmental action, the motion failed, and the Taxi Commission’s denial of the request to add the appellant’s name to medallion no. 129 was upheld.
|
ACTION: Upon motion by President Chin, the Board voted 4-0-1 (Commissioner Saunders absent) to reschedule the request to Dec. 17, 2003 at the written request of the parties.
SPEAKERS: None.
(3G) JURISDICTION REQUEST TO ALLOW LATE FILING OF APPEAL:
Subject property at 616 Shrader Street; Permit suspended on August 6, 2003.
Last day to appeal was August 21, 2003; Jurisdiction request received on Sept. 11, 2003.
|
Letter from Tom Katz, requestor(s), asking that the Board take jurisdiction over the suspension of Building Permit Application No(s). 2003/08/06/1364 & 2003/07/23/0191. Reason(s) for suspension: the first permit was approved erroneously, and the second permit requires further review by the Planning Dept. since both permits did not receive residential guideline review by Planning Dept. preservation technical specialists, which is required for the replacement of windows on architecturally significant buildings like the subject property.
|
ACTION: Upon motion by President Chin, the Board voted 4-0-1 (Commissioner Saunders absent) to grant the jurisdiction request.
SPEAKERS: Tom Katz, requestor, asked the Board to grant him a new 15-day appeal period. Craig Nikitis, PD, responded to the jurisdiction request. No public comment.
(3H) JURISDICTION REQUEST TO ALLOW LATE FILING OF APPEAL:
Subject property at1018 Clayton Street; Permit issued on Sept. 22, 2003
Last day to appeal was October 8, 2003; Jurisdiction request received on October 23, 2003
|
Letter from Francis David Ryan, requestor, asking the Board to take jurisdiction over Building Permit Application No(s). 2003/09/2/5414. Project: construct 7’ X 36” high one-hour fire rated parapet on roof at south side. Permit Holder(s): Gunther Dertz.
|
ACTION: Upon motion by Commissioner Shoemaker, the Board voted 4-0-1 (Commissioner Saunders absent) to grant the jurisdiction request.
SPEAKERS: Christine Ryan, agent for requestor, asked the Board to grant a new 15-day appeal period over the subject permit. Gunther Dertz, permit holder, explained the history of his project and asked the Board to deny the request.
(3I) JURISDICTION REQUEST TO ALLOW LATE FILING OF APPEAL:
Taxi Permit (A-Card) No(s). 051773; Revocation letter dated October 2, 2003
Last day to appeal was October 17, 2003; Jurisdiction request received on October 24, 2003
|
Letter from Khaled Abdelnaby, requestor, asking that the Board take jurisdiction over the revocation of the above-referenced taxi permit. Reason(s) for revocation: non-payment of fees.
|
ACTION: Upon motion by President Chin, the Board voted 4-0-1 (Commissioner Saunders absent) to grant the jurisdiction request.
SPEAKERS: None; the Taxi Commission had no objection to the request as per letter faxed to the Board.
(3J) JURISDICTION REQUEST TO ALLOW LATE FILING OF APPEAL:
Taxi Permit (A-Card) No(s). 055648; Revocation letter dated October 2, 2003
Last day to appeal was October 17, 2003; Jurisdiction request received on October 24, 2003
|
Letter from Ghassen Mosbahi, requestor(s), asking that the Board take jurisdiction over the revocation of the above-referenced taxi permit. Reason(s) for revocation: non-payment of fees.
|
ACTION: Upon motion by President Chin, the Board voted 4-0-1 (Commissioner Saunders absent) to grant the jurisdiction request.
SPEAKERS: None; the Taxi Commission had no objection to the request as per letter faxed to the Board.
(3K) JURISDICTION REQUEST TO ALLOW LATE FILING OF APPEAL:
Subject property at 3801 – 3rd Street; Permit issued on August 20, 2003
Last day to appeal was September 4, 2003; Jurisdiction request received on Oct. 27, 2003
|
Letter from Melvin Washington, requestor(s), asking that the Board take jurisdiction over Building Permit Application No(s). 2003/06/10/6681. Project: install 8 new antennas behind new screen wall; place prefab equipment shelter on roof. Permit Holder(s): Verizon Wireless.
|
ACTION: Request withdrawn by the requestor prior to meeting.
SPEAKERS: None.
(4) APPEAL NO. 03-052
|
LANDO SIU, Appellant(s)
vs.
TAXI COMMISSION, Respondent
|
Appealing the revocation on March 25, 2003, of taxicab medallion #1181.
RESOLUTION NO. 2003-12.
NOTE: At the original hearing of June 4, 2003, the Board voted to uphold the subject revocation. On September 17, 2003, the Board voted to grant the jurisdiction request seeking a second 10-day rehearing request period; the Board also voted that same day to grant the rehearing request.
FOR REHEARING TODAY.
|
ACTION: Upon motion by Commissioner Sugaya, the Board voted 3-0-2 (Commissioners Shoemaker & Saunders absent) to reschedule the appeal to Dec. 10, 2003 at the request of the parties.
SPEAKERS: None.
(5) APPEAL NO. 03-133
|
ISHTIAQ BOKHARI, Appellant(s)
vs.
TAXI COMMISSION, Respondent
|
Appealing the revocation on August 18, 2003, of a Driver of Public Passenger Vehicle for Hire Permit.
RESOLUTION NO. 2003-65.
FOR HEARING TODAY.
|
ACTION: Upon motion by Commissioner Sugaya, the Board voted 3-0-2 (Commissioners Shoemaker & Saunders absent) to reschedule the appeal to Dec. 10, 2003 at the request of the parties.
SPEAKERS: None.
(6) APPEAL NO. 03-114
|
TOM WHELAN, Appellant(s)
vs.
ZONING ADMINISTRATOR, Respondent
|
1441 Montgomery Street.
Appealing a request dated July 7, 2003 for reinstatement of a suspended permit, addressed to Dept. of Building Inspection Director Frank Chiu, asking that Building Permit Application No(s). 2002/09/27/7630 (installation of a motorized chair lift) be reinstated because the Planning Commission has held a discretionary review (DR) hearing and approved the project as proposed.
FOR HEARING TODAY.
|
ACTION: Upon motion by President Chin, the Board voted 4-0-1 (Commissioner Saunders absent) to uphold the subject permit on condition that an NSR be recorded requiring removal of the chair lift upon the appellant vacating or upon the sale of the subject property.
SPEAKERS: Craig Nikitis, PD, explained the request for reinstatement of issued permit after suspension because no notification to the Telegraph Hill Dwellers. The Planning Commissioner denied a DR request and the permit was issued and suspended, and now in compliance with rules and can be reinstated. Tom Whelan, appellant, said he represents himself and other affected neighbors who are not to be in attendance for various reasons. He read a letter from one into the record. He said that the permit holder had not negotiated in good faith. Clint Callan, attorney for permit holder, said the issue is only a matter of inches, and that alternatives to the plans are not economically feasible or simply impossible. One would cost $100,000. Public comment for appellant: Patricia Shean said there has not been an encroachment on the easement until the plan; she herself is disabled on on SSI. No public comment for permit holder. Edwin Callan, permit holder, in rebuttal said that his project is only 10 inches out, and will not inconvenience anyone.
(7) APPEAL NO. 03-091
|
LAURA FREY, Appellant(s)
vs.
DEPT. OF BUILDING INSPECTION, Respondent
PLANNING DEPT. APPROVAL
|
1274 Plymouth Avenue.
Protesting the issuance on May 27, 2003, to Kenley Leung, Permit to Alter a Building (on single-family dwelling: add full bath on 2nd floor; replace existing rotten rear deck/stairs in kind; add 2 bedrooms, 2 bathrooms, family room and laundry at ground floor; no change to building envelope except windows).
APPLICATION NO. 2003/05/27/5566.
FOR HEARING TODAY.
|
ACTION: Upon motion by President Chin, the Board voted 4-0-1 (Commissioner Saunders absent) to reschedule the appeal to Dec. 10, 2003, for the appeal to be the first substantive case on the agenda, and for the permit holder to submit reduced sets of plans.
SPEAKERS: Laura Frey, appellant, requested a rescheduling to a night when all Commissioners would be present. Jeremy Paul, agent for permit holder, objected to the rescheduling request by the appellant and asked that the hearing go forward.
ITEMS (8A) & (8B) WERE HEARD TOGETHER:
(8A) APPEAL NO. 03-096
|
EVELYN WONG, Appellant(s)
vs.
DEPT. OF BUILDING INSPECTION, Respondent
PLANNING DEPT. APPROVAL
|
1331 Green Street.
Protesting the issuance on June 3, 2003, to Stephen Goldstine, Permit to Erect a Building (one-story single-family dwelling with 523sf of ground floor area).
APPLICATION NO. 2001/03/30/5663.
FOR HEARING TODAY.
|
ACTION: This appeal was withdrawn by the appellant, Evelyn Wong.
SPEAKERS: None.
(8B) APPEAL NO. 03-097
|
TAMI TWAROG
& ELIZABETH WRIGHT, Appellant(s)
vs.
DEPT. OF BUILDING INSPECTION, Respondent
PLANNING DEPT. APPROVAL
|
1331 Green Street.
Protesting the issuance on June 3, 2003, to Stephen Goldstine, Permit to Erect a Building (one-story single-family dwelling with 523sf of ground floor area).
APPLICATION NO. 2001/03/30/5663.
FOR HEARING TODAY.
|
ACTION: Upon motion by President Chin, the Board voted 3-1-1 (Commissioner Sugaya dissented, Commissioner Saunders absent) to uphold the subject permit on condition that the subject building be lowered 1 foot. Four votes being required to modify a departmental action, the permit was upheld without any conditions.
SPEAKERS: Elizabeth Wright, co-appellant, said that the earlier variance was granted on condition there be no construction in the front yard where project is proposed. She said the permit holder has continued to abuse the process, and that Imogen Cunningham, the former owner, did not own a car and would be appalled that her garden was to be destroyed in order to make room for a garage. She asked that the hearing be rescheduled to a night when all Commissioners would be present. Tami Twarog, co-appellant, described the 32 letters of support for their appeal, including one from the Russian Hill Neighbors. She said several issues have not been resolved yet, and that the hearing should be postponed until they are resolved. David Cincotta, attorney for permit holder, asked the Board to hold the hearing now, and not continue it again especially because the adjacent neighbor met with his client and withdrew her appeal. He said they have corrected the error in the plans pointed out by Commissioner Sugaya. He reminded the Board that no historic preservation group has come out in support of designation of this building as an historically significant building, and that this a jewel of a project. Stephen Goldstine, permit holder, said the Code requires a parking space for a new dwelling unit, and that the earlier variance decision was done by former ZA Passmore. Public comment for appellants: Linwood Fullam said he opposes the project because it will take away two curbside parking spaces in an area especially congested. Public comment for permit holder: Allen Temko said he is baffled by objections to a project that is a great example of in-fill housing, and that Imogen Cunningham was not narrow-minded. Dennis Gallagher said he is the only other one-family house on the street which is very densely developed and the site is appropriate for the project. Chris Bigelow said this project has had extensive review by DBI and Planning and has been found to be in compliance with all Codes, and policies and objectives of the General Plan which he quoted. Emily Keiler read a letter from Susan deMartini to the Board which described the garden as a security problem which is attractive to homeless people. Stephen Rodgers said the project will be good for the neighborhood and that the garden is an eyesore.
(9) APPEAL NO. 03-129
|
COLMAN BURKE, Appellant(s)
vs.
DEPT. OF BUILDING INSPECTION, Respondent
PLANNING COMMISSION DISAPPROVAL
§ 14 Parties: N/A (Mandatory DR)
|
1238 Masonic Avenue.
Appealing the denial on August 21, 2003, of Permit to Alter a Building (change two-family dwelling to single-family dwelling).
APPLICATION NO. 2003/01/14/5103
FOR HEARING TODAY.
|
ACTION: Upon motion by President Chin, the Board voted 3-0-2 (Commissioners Shoemaker & Saunders absent) to reschedule the appeal to Dec. 3, 2003 at the request of the parties.
SPEAKERS: None.
(10) APPEAL NO. V03-130
|
KEVIN COONEY, Appellant(s)
vs.
ZONING ADMINISTRATOR, Respondent
|
2090 – 45th Avenue.
Appealing the denial on August 20, 2003 of a Rear Yard Set Back Variance (proposal is to construct rear stairs to a proposed 3rd story addition to the existing dwelling).
VARIANCE CASE NO. 2003.0436V.
FOR HEARING TODAY.
|
ACTION: Upon motion by President Chin, the Board voted 4-0-1 (Commissioner Saunders absent) to overrule the denial and grant the variance with adoption of findings as submitted by the appellant.
SPEAKERS: Craig Nikitis, PD, explained the reasons for the denial of the variance application including the failure to meet the hardship requirement. Kevin Cooney, appellant, described his small lot, ad his need for the extension to accommodate his large family. He said his neighbors support him. No public comment.
(11) APPEAL NO. 03-131
|
JOAN GIRARDOT, Appellant(s)
vs.
DEPT. OF BUILDING INSPECTION, Respondent
PLANNING DEPT. APPROVAL
|
345 Marina Boulevard.
Protesting the issuance on August 14, 2003, to Dolores Twitchell, Permit to Alter a Building (garden fence replacement, 40’ long, 8’ in height, 4X4 redwood post every 4‘, lattice covering).
APPLICATION NO. 2033/08/14/2068.
FOR HEARING TODAY.
|
ACTION: Upon motion by President Chin, the Board voted 4-0-1 (Commissioner Saunders absent) to revoke the subject permit.
SPEAKERS: Joan Girardot, appellant, described the fence and its history, and asked the Board to order its removal. She said she is willing to share the cost of a new property line fence built with proper materials and with approved plans. She said that the permit was approved and issued erroneously, and that the permit holder has not complied with the DBI order to abate the code violations. Dolores Twitchell, permit holder, described the problems she has had, and said her fence does not block anyone’s view of the bridge, and that the quality of the fence is her business. Laurence Kornfield, CBI DBI, said that the DBI does not require surveys because of the expense to parties and that one owner cannot build on her neighbor’s parcel, nor can a permit be for construction on someone else’s property. He said the fence was a hazard and in danger of falling over. Craig Nikitis, PD, said there is no planning issue. Public comment for appellant: Emeric Kalman said the fence is not safe because it is not anchored to the ground, and that it should be removed. David Drumheller said he is the son of the appellant but does not live there now. He said the fence is shoddy and does not fit in the neighborhood, and that the former fence was there for 40 years and was removed without any notice to the appellant. Maggie Martinez, niece of the permit holder, said the plants will grow in again and that the pouring of concrete has been suspended until the Board takes action on the appeal. Laurence Kornfield, CBI DBI, said the permit holder has been required to submit plans for the fence but has not done so yet. Catharine Barnes, DCA, explained the NOV abatement process.
(12) APPEAL NO. V03-136
|
DEIRDRE & KENNETH QUIGLEY, Appellant(s)
vs.
ZONING ADMINISTRATOR, Respondent
|
336 – 28th Street.
Protesting the granting on August 20, 2003, to Andy Rodgers, Rear Yard Setback Variance (the stairs that extend from the 2nd story to the 3rd story shall be permitted to encroach into the required rear yard sufficient to provide access to the 3rd floor and the deck on the roof of the building).
VARIANCE CASE NO. 2003.0609V.
FOR HEARING TODAY.
|
ACTION: Upon motion by President Chin, the Board voted 3-1-1 (Commissioner Sugaya dissented, Commissioner Saunders absent) to uphold the subject variance.
SPEAKERS: Ken Quigley, appellant, asked the Board to continue the hearing to a night when all five members are present and described his views of legal defects in the variance decision, and the error in the calendar caption for the case. He said the project has been built without a proper permit and that the variance is meant to compensate for errors by the Planning Department. He said that economic hardship is not sufficient to meet the requirements and that the variance holder is an architect and knows the rules, and should have designed the project in compliance with the codes so that no variance would be needed. Andy Rodgers, variance holder, said they have gone through the required procedures, and they have met with the neighbors who did support the project 2 ½ years ago. No DR request was filed after notice was made. Craig Nikitis, PD, said the department does not make it a practice to cover its errors with variance decisions, and that this decision is supported by the facts in any case. He said this is a case of detrimental reliance on a departmental action. No public comment.
There being no further business, President Chin adjourned the meeting at 10:08 pm.
____________________________ __________________________________
Arnold Y. K. Chin, President Robert H. Feldman, Executive Secretary
Transcripts of these hearings can be obtained from Ms. Claudine Woeber, the Official Court Reporter, 506-0430.
