2009 2008 2007 2006 2005 2004 2003 2002 2001 2000 1999 BOARD OF APPEALS
CITY & COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO
MEETING MINUTES - WEDNESDAY, FEBRUARY 18, 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 (DCA); Craig Nikitas, Acting Zoning Administrator (AZA); Laurence Kornfield, Chief Building Inspector, Dept. of Building Inspection (CBI DBI); 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: Tom Katz explained his problem with window replacement permits.
(2) COMMISSIONERS COMMENTS & QUESTIONS
SPEAKERS: None.
(3) ADOPTION OF BUDGET:
ACTION: Upon motion by President Chin, the Board voted 4-0-1 (Commissioner Saunders absent) to adopt the proposed budget for FY 2004-2005.
SPEAKERS: None.
(4) SPECIAL ITEM(S):
|
Presentation by Planning Dept. staff of the recently adopted Temporary Residential Demolition Policy.
|
SPEAKERS: Patricia Vaughey expressed her concern with the policy and said it had been written by a permit consultant.
ITEMS (5A), (5B) & (5C) SHALL BE HEARD TOGETHER:
(5A) APPEAL NO. 03-147
|
LEUNG TO CHOW, Appellant(s)
vs.
DEPT. OF BUILDING INSPECTION, Respondent
PLANNING COMMISSION DISAPPROVAL
|
111 Lobos Street.
Appealing the denial on September 26, 2003, of Permit to Demolish a Building (two-story single family house with 1,316sf of ground floor area).
APPLICATION NO. 2002/07/15/1446.
FOR HEARING TODAY.
|
(5B) APPEAL NO. 03-148
|
LEUNG TO CHOW, Appellant(s)
vs.
DEPT. OF BUILDING INSPECTION, Respondent
PLANNING COMMISSION DISAPPROVAL
|
111 Lobos Street (Building B).
Appealing the denial on September 26, 2003, of Site Permit to Erect a Building (three-story single family house with 1,602sf of ground floor area).
APPLICATION NO. 2002/07/15/1437S.
FOR HEARING TODAY.
|
(5C) APPEAL NO. 03-149
|
LEUNG TO CHOW, Appellant(s)
vs.
DEPT. OF BUILDING INSPECTION, Respondent
PLANNING COMMISSION DISAPPROVAL
|
111 Lobos Street (Building A).
Appealing the denial on September 26, 2003, of Site Permit to Erect a Building (three-story single family house with 1,602sf of ground floor area).
APPLICATION NO. 2002/07/15/1442S.
FOR HEARING TODAY.
|
ACTION: Upon motion by Vice President Sugaya, the Board voted 3-0-2 (Commissioners Shoemaker and Saunders absent) to reschedule the cases to Feb. 25, 2004.
SPEAKERS: David Silverman, attorney for appellant, requested a rescheduling to a meeting with a full Board.
(6) APPEAL NO. 03-192
|
LETICIA
& LEOPOLDO REDONDO, Appellant(s)
vs.
DEPT. OF BUILDING INSPECTION, Respondent
PLANNING DEPT. APPROVAL
|
710 Edinburgh Street.
Protesting the issuance on November 4, 2003, to Javier Giron, Site Permit to Alter a Building (on single-family house: construct one floor above existing garage as computer room/home office).
APPLICATION NO. 2002/08/28/5143S.
FOR HEARING TODAY.
|
ACTION: Upon motion by Commissioner Chin, the Board vote 4-0-1 (Commissioner Saunders absent) to uphold the permit on condition that no construction take place on the 2nd level of the garage, and on condition that on the rear of the building the exit from the bathroom to the roof deck be eliminated.
SPEAKERS: Leticia Redondo, appellant, described the project and said it appears to be for the creation of an illegal unit in this one-family zoning district. Corazon Meterparel, agent for permit holder, described the addition and the 3 foot light well that is being provided to accommodate the appellants, and that the building will be up to code once the work is done. Craig Nikitas, AZA, explained the non-conforming character of the building and how the project is affected by the rear yard regulations. Public comment for appellants: Michael Hutchinson said he is a contractor, and said he reviewed the project and it seems wrong; he noted the building had been a crack house. No public comment for permit holder. Ronnie Perez, owner, said this is his first property and that he is excited to be doing the project. Craig Nikitas, AZA, said the project meets the Code.
(7) APPEAL NO. 03-193
|
PATRICK McDERMOTT, Appellant(s)
vs.
DEPT. OF BUILDING INSPECTION, Respondent
|
1956-1960 Fell Street.
Appealing the denial on November 14, 2003, of a Permit to Convert (from 8 residential guest rooms and 1 dwelling unit into 3 dwelling units).
FOR HEARING TODAY.
|
ACTION: Upon motion by Commissioner Chin, the Board voted 3-1-1 (Vice President Sugaya dissented, Commissioner Saunders absent) to continue the case to March 3, 2004.
SPEAKERS: Laurence Kornfield, CBI DBI, reported on his discussion with Chief Housing Inspector Rosemary Bosque, who was unable to attend but would if requested to by the Board. Catharine Barnes, DCA, advised as to the impact of the Ellis Act on the appeal. John Baba, attorney for appellant, ecplained the effect of the Ellis Act filing by his client on the permit, and described the case law which he said supports his case. No public comment.
(8) APPEAL NO. 03-194
|
ARA & BERG TEHLIRIAN, Appellant(s)
vs.
DEPT. OF BUILDING INSPECTION, Respondent
PLANNING COMMISSION DISAPPROVAL
DR Requestor(s): JOSE MORALES
|
572 San Jose Avenue.
Appealing the denial on November 21, 2003, of a Site Permit to Alter a Building a Building (on two-unit building: horizontal and vertical addition, 335sf on ground floor, 368sf on 2nd floor, and 1038sf on 3rd floor; electrical, plumbing, and mechanical under separate permit).
APPLICATION NO. 2002/11/04/0682S.
FOR HEARING TODAY.
|
ACTION: Upon motion by Commissioner Chin, the Board voted 4-0-1 (Commissioner Saunders) to continue the case to March 3, 2004 with the public hearing closed.
SPEAKERS: Craig Nikitas, AZA, explained the reasons why the Planning Commission denied the subject permit. Ara Tehlirian, co-appellant, gave the history of his efforts to obtain a permit. He said that the Commission’s only concern was the working out of the rent issue by the parties. He said that he suggested that Mr. Morales get a roommate and apply for Sec. 8 housing vouchers so he can live as he wants. Jim Fay, representing DR Requestor Jose Morales, described the significant work planned for the building which will displace Mr. Morales who needs to live in an affordable unit and wants to stay where he is. Jose Morales, DR Requestor, said he deserves protection so that he can keep his apartment. Public comment for Planning Commission: Ted Gullicksen of the Tenants Union said the apartment will be demolished and Mr. Morales will become homeless and that a new building should be kept under the rent ordinance. Eric Quezada said the project results in the loss of affordable housing. Terrie Frye urged the Board to protect the community from the loss of affordable housing. Steven Shubert of the Tenants Union said it is City policy to prohibit the loss of affordable housing. Amy Balint urged that Mr. Morales be protected from the loss of his home. Charlie Sciammas said there is an affordable housing crisis. Jose Corona urged the Board to uphold the Commission’s decision. Terri Morell said he was withdrawing her support of the appellant, and is now neutral. Lora Traveler read a poem into the record and strongly urged the Board to uphold the denial. Edwin Lindo requested that the denial be upheld.
(9) APPEAL NO. V03-207
|
CYNTHIA GISSLER, Appellant(s)
vs.
ZONING ADMINISTRATOR, Respondent
|
2717 Baker Street.
Protesting the granting on December 16, 2003, to David Nolan (Subject Property Owners Gene & Judy Dale), Rear Yard & Non-Complying Structure Variance(s) (construction of an approximately 850sf 3rd-story addition with adjacent roof deck above the 2-story single-family house, but without the roof deck proposed for the roof of the 3rd-story addition, without the exterior stairs connecting the 3rd-story deck to the roof of the 3rd-story addition, and without the stair penthouse on the roof of the 3rd-story addition).
VARIANCE CASE NO. 2001.1072V.
FOR HEARING TODAY.
|
ACTION: Upon motion by Commissioner Chin, the Board voted 3-0-2 (Commissioners Shoemaker and Saunders absent) to reschedule the appeal to March 3, 2004. Then, upon motion by Commissioner Chin, the Board voted 3-0-2 (Commissioners Shoemaker and Saunders absent) to rescind the previous motion. Afterwards, upon motion by Commissioner Chin, the Board voted 4-0-1 (Commissioner Saunders absent) to uphold the variance on condition that the addition on the 3rd floor be pulled back 3 feet on the Baker Street side.
SPEAKERS: Fred Campagnoli, attorney for appellant, described the contacts between the parties and said that compromise was possible but that there has not been a response from the owners. Judy Dale, co-variance holder, said she has met with the neighbors twice but the compromise proposed was not structurally or economically viable. David Nolan, architect for variance holder, said that no agreement had been reached and it was left to the ZA to decide. Gene Dale, co-variance holder, spoke in support of his wife’s arguments. Craig Nikitas, AZA, described the decision and said it’s justified and the proposed addition is small and appropriate. Public comment for appellants: Patricia Vaughey spoke in support of the appellant. Joseph Perelli said the process was flawed because the ZA had said the variance hearing would reconvene and it never was, with the neighbors left in the dark. Henry Alker described the process as one of ambiguous norms and that a clear decision is needed to cure the situation. Mary Caroline Gissler detailed the effects on the neighbors and her sister’s property of the proposed addition and said the shadow created will cause mold on her property. Michael Fraser said the addition will cast a shadow on his reading room, and will block all morning light to his apartment. Karen Laughlin said she rents next door and the project will expand a modest house into a million dollar one. Jo Kennedy said that the stairway is illegal according to an architect and that sunlight in the City is different according to her European friends. Patricia Alker described her plants in detail and said the proposed addition will shadow and kill them. Brian McDonell said the proposed deck will face into his master bedroom, and that there is no sufficient hardship to justify granting the variance.
(10) APPEAL NO. V03-208
|
DAVID CANNON, Appellant(s)
vs.
ZONING ADMINISTRATOR, Respondent
|
2 Ord Court.
Protesting the granting on Dec. 18, 2003, to Charlie Barnett (Subject Property Owner Fredric Silverman), Rear Yard Variance (construction of a new 2nd-story, vertical addition for the existing single-family house).
VARIANCE CASE NO. 2003.0828V.
FOR HEARING TODAY.
|
ACTION: Upon motion by President Harrington, the Board voted 3-0-2 (Commissioners Shoemaker and Saunders absent) to reschedule the case to March 3, 2004.
SPEAKERS: None.
There being no further business, President Harrington adjourned the meeting at 9:35 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.
