Meeting Information

SPEAKERS: None

SPEAKERS: President Chin thanked Commissioner Saunders for her year as vice president and the other Commissioners for their support throughout the past year. Commissioner El Qadah thanked the officer for their efforts over the past year and the staff for arranging the holiday party.

ACTION: Upon motion by Commissioner El Qadah, the Board voted 5-0 to re-elect Arnold Chin President, and elect John McInerney as Vice President.

SPEAKERS: None

ITEM A: 1030-1032 Balboa Street. Letter from Victoria Peterson, requesting that the Board take jurisdiction over Building Permit Application No. 2001/10/09/0242 (demolish and permanently remove illegal unit and convert to storage). Permit Holder: Allen Fong. PUBLIC HEARING HELD NOVEMBER 7, 2001. FOR FURTHER CONSIDERATION TODAY.

Date Jurisdiction Request Received: October 26, 2001

ACTION: Upon motion by Commissioner Cullum, the Board voted 4-1 (President Chin dissented) to deny jurisdiction.

SPEAKERS: No appearances by parties.

ITEM B: Adoption of a Notice of Special Restrictions (NSR) for the property at 2836 Washington Street, Appeal 01-138, 2836 Washington Street LLC vs. DBI, PCD, heard December 5, 2001. Upon motion by President Chin, the Board voted 4-0-1 (Commissioner Cullum absent) to overrule the denial by the Planning Commission, and grant the subject permit on condition that the doors to the rear decks be removed and replaced with windows, and with an NSR to be recorded prohibiting the use of the two roof areas as decks, with said NSR to be adopted on December 12, 2001.

ACTION: Upon motion by President Chin, the Board voted 4-1 (Commissioner McInerney dissented) to adopt the subject NDR with amendments made by President Chin.

SPEAKERS: Rene Peinado, appellant, said his permit is only about the parapet walls which he says are original and should be permitted to remain, and he opposes the imposition of a Notice of

Special Restrictions as proposed, especially since the facts have been resolved now as to the age of the parapet walls. Larry Badiner, ZA, said he thinks the proposed NSR addresses the intentions of the Commission.

ACTION: Upon motion by President Chin, the Board voted 4-0 to recuse Commissioner McInerney. Afterwards, upon motion by Commissioner El Qadah, the Board voted 4-0-1 (Commissioner McInerney recused) to uphold the subject permit.

SPEAKERS: Emily Joy Benkert, appellant, said she had had no notice from Planning of this project. She has a decent view now and the project will block light and air and view and she will face a blank wall and she is trying to raise a family. David Silverman, attorney for permit holder said the only issue is loss of sunlight and he has visited her house and that there is much open space with lots of sunlight around the building with only one window affected by the project and many fifty-foot buildings in the area already. Gabriel Ng, architect for the project, said the appellant’s building is twenty-five feet away from the proposed building and there will be a 25% of lot depth rear yard at the occupied floor and the SLR zoning encourages new residential construction. Larry Badiner, ZA, said the area has mixed uses, the project is Code complying and it can’t be reduced in size because of required ground level parking. Laurence Kornfield, CBI for DBI said the garage will go to the property line with a deck on top of the garage and with a ten-foot wall among the property line.

PUBLIC COMMENT FOR PERMIT HOLDER: Joe O’Donoghue said that even if the proposed building is chopped back it will make no difference to the sunlight issue; since the window is 25 feet back from the property line.

NO PUBLIC COMMENT FOR APPELLANT.

ACTION: Upon motion by Commissioner Cullum, the Board voted 4-1 (Commissioner McInerney dissented) to overrule the denial and grant the subject permit on condition that the tree be replaced with an arbutus endo.

SPEAKERS: Paul Sacamano DPW Urban Forester, said the tree is an overgrown New Zealand Christmas Tree that is too close to a utility box but seems to be healthy. The species is appropriate for this neighborhood and takes wind well though it does have aggressive rooting. It has been neglected. Ms. Quincy Yu, appellant, said the City planted the tree and she has maintained it for years. It is in violation as it is unsuitable and in wrong location. She wants to replace it with a more suitable species that is more than three feet from the utility box.

ACTION: Upon motion by Commissioner Cullum, the Board voted 4-0 to recuse Commissioner McInerney. Afterwards, upon motion by President Chin, the Board voted 4-0-1 (Commissioner McInerney recused) to overrule the denial and grant the permit to legalize the 41^st unit.

SPEAKERS: Larry Badiner, ZA, said the permit was denied because of the density limit which it exceeds, both 40 and 41 units exceed the present limit. Jeremy Paul, consultant to the Appellant, said he was a paleo-anthropologist in Africa and the evidence here is similar in nature to an African case, in that there is much evidence to show this was an original unit installed with the construction of the building in 1927, built for a resident manager, of which there is none today.

ACTION: Upon motion by Commissioner El Qadah, the Board voted 5-0 to uphold the subject Notice of Alleged Violation.

SPEAKERS: Larry Badiner, ZA, said his staff had made a site visit and said that there are two units for commercial use and two for residential and he explained the Commission’s resolution regarding mergers. Jeremy Paul for the appellants explained the history of the building and its changes of use over the years since it was built as three townhouses in a row, with storefronts in front of each and much work being done to them now.

PUBLIC COMMENT FOR ZONING ADMINISTRATION: Catherine Lennox said she is the attorney for one of the tenants, who has been evicted and she is here on her own time. She said any merger triggers DR by the Planning Commission but the appellant has avoided DR by putting fake information on his permit application. Barry Cohn, a tenant in the building said it has always been four units and has been changed to two units during the past three months.

PUBLIC COMMENT FOR APPELLANTS: Pat Buskovich said he has no interest in the outcome of the hearing and he explained what a legal description is and the Certificate of Final Completion.

ACTION: Upon motion by President Chin, the Board voted 5-0 to uphold the subject permit on condition that the overhang be allowed, and on condition that the subject windows be changed to clear glass from obscured glass.

SPEAKERS: Jerry McDonald, appellant, told the Board about his complaint to the Sunshine Task Force because of violation of the ordinance by the Planning Commission and said the permit holder hasn’t complied with the DR decision of the Commission. He pointed out several inconsistencies in the plans by Jerome Altman, architect. Laurie Bell, permit holder, explained the many compromises that have been included in the plans to accommodate the neighbors and she couldn’t reach an agreement with the appellant. Jerome Altman, architect for the permit holder, explained the setback and said the addition isn’t visible from the corner. Larry Badiner, ZA, said he thinks the complaints have no merit and the notices sent out are adequate, and the project meets the Residential Design Guidelines, with well detailed plans.

PUBLIC COMMENT FOR APPELLANT: Dave Monks, President of the Friends of Noe Valley, said he is concerned with the issue of due process, and said there were serious errors and he can’t figure out what the project will look like. Vickie Rosen, President of Upper Noe Neighbors, said she thought Planning has made many mistakes in this case and denied Appellant’s request to reschedule DR hearing so he could participate. He has little light and privacy.

PUBLIC COMMENT FOR PERMIT HOLDER: Suzanne Stevens said the Bells are friendly and helpful people. She said her house is the shortest and the most affected by the project.

ACTION: Upon motion by Commissioner McInerney, the Board voted 5-0 to reschedule the matter to Feb. 6, 2002.

SPEAKERS: Sue Hestor asked that this item be put over two or three weeks because she hasn’t been able to see the Planning files and the Planner handling the case is on vacation. The project now is different than the one approved by the Commission and her clients are lay people who didn’t appeal the site permit. Patrice Fambrini speaking for the permit holder said he agrees to a two-week delay but no longer.

ACTION: Upon motion by Commissioner Cullum, the Board voted 5-0 to uphold the subject permit on condition that the railing on the top balcony be extended to 5 feet and that the slats be closer together.

SPEAKERS: Mark Posth, appellant, said he represents two families and that some neighbors in support of him are present. They tried to compromise and failed and he is not against the project though he opposes certain aspects of it. He opposes the solarium and two decks in the rear yard behind the house. James Judge said he designed a modest expansion to the rear and it is recessed four feet six inches from the side property line and is designed to be sensitive to both neighbors. The project meets the Code and there was no DR request. Nancy Drew Bell said the addition is to provide a home for her mother.

PUBLIC COMMENT FOR APPELLANTS: Dana Byrne of 55 Carl Street said she lives next door and the project is ridiculous and will be a story higher. Her home is small with a small garden. Alexander Crockett said he hadn’t known of DR request until it was too late. He said while project may technically be in compliance it is too high and violates the purpose of the rear yard requirement.

PUBLIC COMMENT FOR PERMIT HOLDER: Rita Reed testified to the good character of the permit holder who causes no noise problem for the neighbors who also support him.

ACTION: Upon motion by Commissioner McInerney, the Board voted 4-0 to recuse President Chin. Afterwards, upon motion by Commissioner Cullum, the Board voted 4-0-1 (President Chin recused) to continue the matter to Feb. 20, 2002.

SPEAKERS: Larry Badiner, ZA, explained why he had denied the proposal for a third story in the rear yard, which would not be in character with the neighborhood and the variance is not justified. Jerry Klein for the appellants said that he felt the project is justified for the appellant, a firefighter, and his family. He said that four-story buildings are common in this area.

NO PUBLIC COMMENT FOR EITHER SIDE.

Don Barant, son of the appellant, said that his mother passed away in September and he needs the additional space for his daughter who is moving back home and can’t afford to buy a house and another daughter needs housing also.

ACTION: Upon motion by Commissioner Cullum, the Board voted 5-0 to overrule both determinations with a finding that the subject demolitions were justified because of imminent danger.

SPEAKERS: Laurence Kornfield explained the hearing officer’s decision that this was an unlawful demolition, which resulted in the removal of the building’s top two floors. He explained the difficulty the City Departments are having in amending the provision on unlawful demolition. Here the scope of the permit was exceeded. Jermey Paul for the appellant said an inspector had cited the building as unsafe and then the inspectors were changed. He said there has been no change in the exterior of the building.

NO PUBLIC COMMENT FOR DEPARMENT.

PUBLIC COMMENT FOR THE APPELLANT: Winky Wong said he saw the building and it was terrible and scary and it needs to be torn down.

There being no further business, President Chin adjourned the meeting at 10:31 p.m.

_____________________________ _________________________________

Arnold Y. K. Chin, President Robert H. Feldman, Executive Secretary