Skip to main content

tv   Recreation and Park Commission 11917  SFGTV  January 19, 2017 9:00pm-12:01am PST

9:00 pm
the recreation and parks commission. >> commissioner buell, here, commissioner low, commissioner anderson, here, commissioner harrison, commissioner mcdonnell, commissioner bonilla will be about 10 minutes late this morning. just as a reminder if you could please turn off any sound devices that could go off during the meeting.
9:01 pm
and take any secondary conversations outside so that the meeting proceeds efficiently as possible. if you would like to speak on any items today, please fill out a blue card. it is not required, but it is helpful. unless announced by the president, each person will have 3 minutes for public comment. ch if there is an item that you are interested in that is not on the agenda you can speak during general public comment. in order to allow equal time for all, neither the commission nor staff will respond to any questions during public comment. the commission may ask questions of staff after public comment is closed. last, if the fire alarm is to
9:02 pm
activate, you must exit using any exit. the elevators will not be available for use. if you need assistance, please go directly across the hall from us in the men's restroom. there is a security box and press it and security will answer and let them know where you are and they will assist you. >> we are on item 2, the president's report. item 11 and recreation and parks department budget. it is a discussion only item. not an action item. >> commissioner? >> thank you, i will be brief. it's clear to me as we enter the new year and tomorrow's weekend
9:03 pm
celebrations in washington, i think the recreation and parks department is going to be challenged. there is some indication that the city can lose as much as a billion dollars in funds because of our city status. we have serious concerns about the future of the endangered species act and the work were doing to protect endangered species. there may be a result of the causes and that will affect us in everything we do. while i am of the opinion of the majority and the americans don't agree with this, nor did they vote that way, the system we have did put in place this administration and did seem determine to make some of these changes. i guess my message to everybody is while we are a sanctuary
9:04 pm
city, make the parks a sanctuary and that may bring about the sad cuts. with that, that concludes my report. >> is there anyone who would like to make a public comment under the president's report? seeing none, public comment is closed. now to item 3, general manager's report. >> to your remarks, i will only say amen. i'm going to start this year with a sad melancholy note unfortunately. i want to take a second to honor two members of our parks and recreation family who we lost. lou who passed away monday night due to a heart attack.
9:05 pm
she has been a gardener since 2001. she started her recreation and parks position with urban forestry and then the nursery. i saw her a few months ago. she had a passion for plants and an avid member and volunteer for many plant societies, the york society, and several others. she inspired many people on the plant knowledge and she became very invaluable. she will be remembered by all. i had the honor of participating in the staff driven -- event and there may have been 150
9:06 pm
staff people there. it was a really lovely and special event and a reminder of the fact that we are a professional family. it was heartwarming during a sad occasion like that to remember her in her honor. also jason mccardey who was an instructor who worked in the enrichment program in the fall in 2014 and various sites in the city. she had a masters and was a very passionate artist and very active in the community. sadly he was one of the victims of last year's oakland warehouse fire, the ghost fire. especially with ms. greenberg who is here who worked with jason at saint mary's, he would bring his
9:07 pm
own equipment to teach to children. he created ping-pong tournaments and always ready to dive in with conversations with these young middle schoolers. he talked a lot about his time at recreation and parks. he said she was the one for her because the way jason interacted with her little brother because of his experience with adhd. he learned to deal with all kinds of kids at his job. before i move on to other news, i would respectfully ask for a motion to adjourn today's meeting in memory of their lives. indeed. >> some other news, this
9:08 pm
weekend we held several days to honor martin luther king jr.. we did a day of service of humanity for habitat and turning soil for preparation and at ocean beach as part of the national golden recreation area we did a clean up project. it was great to see so many people coming out to celebrate the honor and the spirit not just for martin luther king jr. but what that day means to so many of us. verma compost. come learn with us this saturday. i assume weather permitting.
9:09 pm
between 1-3:00 p.m. at the golden park community garden. stewardship education program. the event includes games, food and much activities for students. it is a free event. we will also be hosting a series of city job fest in the next several weeks. we will be out with several other city agencies hiring at the rec's center on january 21st, hamilton recreation center february 8th, and mission from february 7th. along with the u.s. post office, the human services agency through its jobs now program which is a great way to get people in the workforce to get them in some experience, sheriff's departments and fire
9:10 pm
department and many other organizations. there will be resources and applications. the job site hours 10:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m.. on january 28th, at the eco center at harrington park we will be hosting our green agers event and a celebration of the 5th anniversary. as you know, green agers is our youth leadership program to kids going to school in the southeastern neighborhood to get active in learning and it's through open parks and open spaces and work with staff and use parks and open spaces for
9:11 pm
projects. next saturday's event includes a keynote address by myra rodgers. and you will hear an update in a little bit. it's to discuss the budget for fiscal year 18-19. we'll be talking about the budget instructions and how to interact with proposition b. and february 2nd, from hamilton center, and the jolie rec's center. and we'll discuss how it applies to our budget priorities. our streetscape opening was for saturday, but was changed to february 4th. p some of you were at the
9:12 pm
ground breaking last year as part of the san francisco public transportation authority, sf mta, this project is really a first in san francisco. it converts two lanes of vehicle traffic at maclaren park into a permanent bike pathway and for pedestrians. and following the ribbon cutting, the staff will host a workshop with residents to discuss additional future improvements in maclaren park. lastly, the california parks and recreation society will have it's program with creating a community award excellence this coming march. every summer as you know for several years, be more than 50 teams join us at the camp -- for our
9:13 pm
outdoor experience with several city departments and other agencies to allow children to get out of the city and experience nature. cprs is awarded excellence in the outstanding achievement in the design and communication and community improvement programming. and this is a community and improvement and programming award. i would like to thank the entire recreation staff for their continued improvement. lastly for this month in part, we showed the skateboard piece of this which is how we ended in 2016 and show a little bit more of a well-rounded look at this amazing park opening from december.
9:14 pm
>> this is -- this is an awesome day.
9:15 pm
>> so, this is a very special
9:16 pm
place. that concludes the general manager's report. >> commissioner low? >> i also wanted to thank staff particularly lorraine dan ford and jackie for putting such a nice event together for martin luther king jr.. it was a great gathering of staff and volunteers and the community. really inspiring speeches and it was just very inspirational to go to such a nice event. i want to thank them for creating such an event and bringing the community together. >> is there any public comment under the general manager's report? seeing none, public comment is closed. now we are open to public
9:17 pm
comment. the public is welcome to make any comments . public comment. i have one. public speaker: good morning, my name is hashimoto. i'm from japantown. in april we are celebrating our cherry blossom festival. so what you are seeing here now is the entry to the japan center west mall. this is the most popular
9:18 pm
building in the mall. there is a lot of traffic at the mall. you see the broken tiles at the entrance of the mall. there are more pictures here, the conditions of the tile. another one here, and the japantown community expressed our concern to the district supervisor and the staff from recreation and parks department. following that, the day after they placed all of these cones up there. it's like the obstacle course going in and out of that mall and i see people stumble over them. thankfully no one has tripped and fallen yet. i wanted to bring this to your
9:19 pm
commission. i want to thank commissioner bonilla and harrison for going to the facility and want to get the assessment. i have -- am the owner of the garage and i understand the assessment is being reviewed at this time. i want to bring this to your attention. our cherry blossom festival is coming up and it's in april and will be visited by over 200,000 people. this is a great concern for all of us. >> thank you. >> is there any other public comment under general public comment? being none, this item is closed. >> we are now on item 5, the consent calendar. is there anyone who like to make public comment under the
9:20 pm
consent calendar? being none, public comment is closed. commissioners, we need a motion. >> so moved. >> second. >> all in favor say, "aye". >> aye. >> any opposed? so moved. we are now on item 6. the election of officers. commissioner buell, would you like me to? >> i would appreciate if you would handle the affairs of this item. >> okay. commissioners, let me just quickly tell you the process. i am going to ask for a motion and a second to open the nominations for president. then you will vote on it and we will actually have the nomination. >> so moved. >> okay. let me finish the process. i will close the nomination and you will actually vote and we'll do the same thing for vice-president.. we have a motion and second for opening the nomination. all in favor say, "aye". >> aye. >> any opposed? great, the nominations are now open for
9:21 pm
president. i see commissioner low, you have your mike on or your request to speak. >> thank you. following the current president's opening remarks, i'm with hi. and i would like to see his tenure continue for at least another year. it's been great to have the leadership of mr. buell as president. he's head of the parks and open space and facilities for all san franciscans. >> it is my honor to second that nomination. okay. with that, the nominations are now closed. we are now voting on the nomination of commissioner mark buell for the office of president. all in favor say, "aye". >> aye. >> any opposed?
9:22 pm
congratulations, president buell. [ applause ]. >> we are now going to the election of vice-president. i need a motion and second. >> so moved. >> second. >> all in favor say, "aye". >> aye. >> any opposed? thank you, the nominations are now open for vice-president commissioner harrison, i see your --? >> it would be my honor to nominate commissioner low for vice-president. >> do we have a second? nominations are now closed. the position for nominating commissioner low as vice-president. all in favor say, "aye". >> aye. >> any opposed? .
9:23 pm
congratulations. [ applause ] >> hold on. i messed up. before, i have to retract everything. give me one second. i need to know if there is any public comment on this? being none. let's take the vote again for president and vice-president. i don't want you to get in unofficially. all in favor say, "aye". >> aye. >> any opposed? for commissioner buell? okay. >> commissioner low, vice-president. >> aye. >> now it's official. my apologies. many >> the last time i'm going to hand it over to you margaret. thank you very much. let me briefly say that i consider it a true honor and privilege to serve as president. i will genuinely tell you that this commission has some of the best members of any commission in
9:24 pm
the city. i think the department is running well with it's good position and management and staff. i thank each and everyone of you and i look forward to working with commissioner low as vice-president. >> thank you. >> i also want to echo those remarks, i think the commission and the department is a great partnership and we really see our mission to make sure that all parks and open space are available for all san franciscans even during this difficult time. i continue to look forward to work with staff and commissioners to continue to keep parks and recreation and open spaces available. >> now item 7. san francisco zoo
9:25 pm
>> good morning, congratulations, vice-president buell and low. i want to echo what you said about the department. it really is an honor to work with such a dedicated team. thank you. p it's been a good year so far with the san francisco. everything is running great and it was an incredibly strong month with 35% in just 1 month over projections. we were very happy to see that.
9:26 pm
so after a very successful december and january with rain, but now we are into happy zoo year to surround yourselves with animals. but with the holiday weekend martin luther king jr. it was a very successful weekend. we had a nice break from the wet weather with nearly 15,000 people over the weekend. that was an 8% increase in projected for the entire weekend. again, i'm happy to see these trends with attendance being up. we now move into the luna ar new year. the year of the rooster. january 28th and 29, we'll have folk dance performances and kids
9:27 pm
can find fun facts about the animals and chinese calendar and you can go to the family farm to see the roosters. if you were born in the year of the rooster, you get complimentary admission. we continue with our stock program. which is stand and take our pledge. we continue to have a strong voice in this. just recently we were thrilled to hear about the ban that china has now that will go into effect by the end of 2017 which will close down the largest ivory market. several thousand of people have already taken the pledge. you can do it at the park or online. ch i spoke about our polar
9:28 pm
bear uulu. she turned 36 years old. if you turn 36 this year, you can come out and have a frozen cake. it's very exciting. >> zoo lights in december it was a success. we did 25% fewer days this year to try to tighten up the event. but we greatly enhanced and increased the revenues and the attendance this year in an even shorter period. the revenue with an increase of 36%. we didn't get rained out. >> the zoo has so many wonderful and dedicated volunteers. one of
9:29 pm
them is maryann hail. you probably have seen most of the photography we show you is by maryann. she is there everyday taking photographs. and she was recognized by this magazine. this is an incredible photo of the new infant. i want to say congratulations to maryann and recognize the incredible work she does. we have a few new faces. this is or bird. come out to see him if you have not. he's incredible and still growing. the colors on his face are absolutely incredible.
9:30 pm
and to the far right we have the male condor. the other new face is freckles. we are going to be talking about him and hopefully you will see in the social media and the news as well. this is a very rare penguin who has joined the colony. he looks like a dalmatian. he is spotted. he's perfectly healthy but he has a -- he's notal albino, but he has an augmentation of the skin. he is white with a black poke a dot. >> in february we have our valentine's promotion of will you be mine. they are sending love to all that come visit him. he's about 55 years old we
9:31 pm
believe and going strong. we also on the 15th opened up registration for the summer camps for spring and summer. we attract thousands of kids during the camps. those will open up online. if you have any kids or know of kids, just have them come on out. it's a great program. to end with a lighter note as i did last month as well. a little fun fact since it's the year of the rooster. did you know there are more chickens on the planet that any other birds. there were more than 19 billion chickens worldwide. >> that's good news for the roosters. >> exactly and for the cows. and we do have a rooster out in the children's zoo. c'mon out and visit us.
9:32 pm
that concludes my report, thank you. ch >> is there any public comment on this item? being none, public comment is closed. we are now on item 8. community opportunity fund for renovation and burial removal project in increase to contract amount. >> good morning, commissioners. i'm the project manager in the recreation capital division. the item before you today is a discussion and possible action to amend the construction contract with minerva construction for the community opportunity fund courts renovation and the burial project to
9:33 pm
increase the contract amount from $388,000 to an amount not to exceed $695,324. an increase which is greater than 10% over the already approved contract amount. the project is fully funded. this project honors the strategic plan in the following ways. strategy one by strengthening the quality of the parks and facility. strategy four inspires stewardship by constructing the natural resources. to provide you some background. the courts project has executed in two phases. the first was to renovate the existing park restroom through the bond program. the second phase is a burial removal project which is to provide an
9:34 pm
accessible path of travel from the park playground to the newly renovated restroom. construction for the second phase of the project began in june of 2014. it includes a new lawn and new irrigation and two tables. in the fall of 2015, funds became available through the operations general fund. our plan is to use these funds to fully renovate the basketball courts during the construction project to minimize disruption and park closure time. the existing tennis and basketball courts are decades old and in need of repair. the scope of renovation includes the replacement of the existing paving and restriping the courts. new basketball post, back boards and nets, and new fencing surrounding the
9:35 pm
court. staff justifies this request as the court resurfacing is long over due in the park and completing this work now will minimize site impact and park closure time. collectively the scope of both the approved and pending change orders will greatly enhance the experience for park users at the courts. in closing, we anticipate the opening of the park in late february to early march this year. i have attached recent site photos to the staff report. i will be happy to answer any questions you might have. thank you. >> commissioner low? >> we received an e-mail about how criticizing the handling of our change orders and not having this run through our change orders through dpw. and not processing them
9:36 pm
timely, can you respond to that in connection to this request to change order. canned -- can you respond to that? >> yes. i spoke with the capital group, the project manager, at the e-mail you are referring to is the joe dimaggio project. yes, it says that dp did not follow all the protocols. our practice is to ensure that all change orders have approval from dpw and there is a memo attached to it. that is our process. this before you today has an approval already. >> explain to us what's the process for change orders?
9:37 pm
>> just in these terms, the contractor submits the request. we review it if it merited or not and make sure it's not work that we have already paid for. we review it with the entire team, including the design team, dpw and recreation and parks and make sure the cost is reasonable and we in turn provide a response to the contract to say it's approved aforesaid amount. after the contractor agrees to the amount we are proposing, there is a memo attached to it that the contractor also approves and that is attached to the change order itself. >> the change orders should go all the way up.
9:38 pm
i should add an additional note to that, in addition to the process, which by the way, there is a drive oftentimes. if a change order is not dealt with an in a timely fashion, oftentimes there is an extended negotiation going on to get to the bottom of signing the responsibility between the different parties. it's not always the contractor 100%. it's very rarely the city 100% and the contractor. the financial responsibility decision does take a while. it is settled through the process that is outlined and that is the beginning of a chain of approvals that culminates in both like my approval and also muhammad nearos. there is a memo created into an electronic system and that approval chain goes through the department of public works chain of command channel and i'm included in that
9:39 pm
chain of command as well and then to muhammad and the department authorizing that change order. there is quite a bit of review. and then to lopez, the city architect and all the bureau at dpw to ensure there is a lot of vetting. all of that bureaucracy often does many times contribute to delays and processing of change orders in the time and fashion that we aspire to. >> this change order has gone through all of that? >> that's correct. >> thank you. >> is there any public comment on this item? seeing none, public comment is closed. commissioner anderson? >> i'm sorry, a couple of things. what is the location of these >> douglas street between
9:40 pm
24th. it looks like these change orders came about because of the contracts for the painting of the courts? it's not additional money that was anticipated. it was money found to be used for this project, is that correct? >> that's right. >> a change order is not necessarily a dirty word notwithstanding -- the audit. there are change orders for a variety of different reasons and i think don noted that it's usually, there is a very complicated relationship between the folks doing construction and whoever it was public works and somebody else from the design team that came up with the initial design of the project to us. often a change order or a contract modification and you will continue to see
9:41 pm
these is because our strategy is to leverage the amount of improvement for a project. sometimes we take a capital project and add capital dollars to do surfacing like here when we can. modifications are change orders. sometimes they are good and sometimes they are because of something unexpected that is found when you dig during a project or because of some confusion in the inter play between the design and construction. lots of issues for that and we welcome the audit process to ensure we are holding our partners accountable and the public is holding us accountable. we have a good relationship with the controllers office and they spot some projects and when something happens like with joe dimaggio makes it a constant improvement and
9:42 pm
better next time. >> my interest for leveraging that to get a basketball court. thank you. >> seeing no other, we entertain a motion. >> all in favor say, "aye". >> aye. >> any opposed? thank you. >> we are on item 9. golden gate park murphy wind mill approval of architectural and engineering design contract. >> good morning, the item i have for you is for approval of an architectural design contract in the amount of $326,373 for the murphy wind mill project. you know that the wind mill project has been a work in progress for many many years. i have had my feet wet in that project for a dozen years now. this particular project that i bring before you is basically an
9:43 pm
improvement to the existing project that was completed in 2011. the wind mill is operational at this moment and every saturday as part of the routine maintenance program. the wind mill is operated by our stationery engineer and our structural maintenance yard. the previous director of that division pointed out some safety concerns that he thought were warranted. we worked with jeff in our health and safety division and our engineering team, the structural maintenance yard and hired a consultant to come out to evaluate the facility to make sure it's safer. they identified a whole list of possible improvements to make it a safer environment. we took that information and sent it out for an rfp to help us implement
9:44 pm
those improvement elements. the firm that we would like to have approved on this project. we've taken this rfp process to the civil service commission and they approved us moving forward with this outside contract. and the department of public works has also approved this. as part of this design team, we are also bringing as part of the team is lucas who is the wind mill expert that helped us renovating the wind mill and he's going to be in an advisory role on this project for these improvement elements. . i'm happy to go into more history on the wind mill and some of the improvements we have done in the past, but i want to cut it short there and ask for your approval for this particular contract agreement. >> thanks, dan. commissioner anderson? >> good morning, i was wondering if you can just tell me, a little bit
9:45 pm
about the murphy wind mill. why is it there and why is it called murphy? >> where to start on that one. murphy wind mill was given to the city as a gift in 1902. daniel murphy donated, roughly about $10,000 to the department. the goal was to basically water golden gate park with daly city. people thought he was crazy at the time with having an aquifer water mill near the ocean. it was built in 1905 and stopped during the earthquake and completed in 1907 and
9:46 pm
operated as a functional wind mill for about a dozen years and then electricity came in and the wind mill stopped function for moving water in the park. it has operated from that time forward and deteriorated over the years. in 1998, a friends group came together and interested in revitalizing the wind mill. from that point forward we came up with a multi-base project to get it underway. >> thank you. >> a little note because of the idea of pumping water was to the rest of the half of the park. >> it's actually a well and still in existence today. they pumped water to a lake at the park and the wind mill pumped water to the lake. it's really a significant part of our
9:47 pm
park stream has been in the 1950s and the two largest one time working wind mills in north america. >> in the world. and the park was gravity set with irrigation. >> great. my kids played near one of those when they were little. glad to know that. >> dan, you get an a in history. >> is there any public comment on this item? seeing none, public comment is closed. >> i will entertain a motion? >> i would like to get this spinning again and move to have this approved. >> i'm rolling up behind you. >> is that more than hot air? >> it's too much hot air. >> is there a second? >> second. >> moved and seconded. all in favor say, "aye". >> aye. >> any opposed? so moved. >> we are now on item 10. recreation and park department operations plan for fiscal
9:48 pm
year 2018 good morning commissioners, taylor from the planning and finance division. we are here to discuss and possibly approve or first ever proposed operational plan. before we get into the details, i want to set the stage to remind
9:49 pm
everyone how this fits into the larger planning cycle now required by the passage of proposition b. we started back in october with the equity metrix which was then integrated into the strategic plan with a 5-year look ahead and then came the capital plan in december which is a 2-year look ahead, and followed now by the operational plan also a 2-year look ahead, and then the final point, the budget. the operational plan serves as a link between the long-term purpose of the strategic plan and the short-term focus of the annual budget process. as a final note on this slide, we will be repeating the cycle annually for 29 more years.
9:50 pm
the duration of the proposition b. it's help to remind us what the charter tells us to do. i'm going to read just the blue highlighted. the department shall approve the plan within the strategic plan the department plans to undertake or accomplish during the next buggery period. -- budgetary period. in other words in the next 5 years what are you going to do during the next 5-year period. it's helpful to remember the structure of the strategic plan. so we have this 5-year strategic plan. it has five strategies. beneath those are 15 object ives and the
9:51 pm
initiatives of the actions of the projects of the real concrete task that when accomplished will help achieve the goals of the objective and potentially improve our performance metrix and move towards our strategies. every year there will be an annual results report with the data on how we did in both the operations plan, the capital plan, the strategic plan metrix as well as the equity analysis which is underneath and infused in all of this. and this cycle, this connecting iterative spiderweb of a planning cycle will repeat. the plan itself, i have
9:52 pm
copies. i'm sorry, i forgot. it really is a big list of things to do with concrete milestones, which division is going to be leading that action and what the target either the achievements, the steps are over the next 2 years. kind of hard to show. so i actually built a presentation just with highlights. so we are going to take a couple highlights for each strategy that are in the operational plan, but i'm happy to take any questions that
9:53 pm
are discussed and other details. i wanted to say the way this was done to develop the operational plan, the staff reviewed, prioritized in sequence really working together looking at what in the strategic plan and thinking about staff resources, financial resources, policy priorities with already currently active and each division decided what it could undertake or accomplish during the reporting period here which is fy 18, the next fiscal year and the year after that fy 19. each year we'll have a 2-year look ahead. starting with inspiring public space. we are going to be implementing a park a ranger staffing model, a
9:54 pm
community based park -- a ranger staffing model. we are also going to prioritize deferred maintenance and renewels and discretionary capital resources for the equity zones. to inspire a place, we are going to start a spanish language permit assistance program. instead of going online for a permit on the park, we are going to have spanish speaking staff located at mission playground clubhouse. we are going to expand programs that connect children to nature.
9:55 pm
and inspire investment. we are going to talk more about this when katie talks budget. under this larger goal to inspire investment and philanthropy, we are going to engage in projects to understand the equity zone. this is taking our equity analysis to the street and validating it and verifying it with more firsthand experience and people telling us more about their parks. we have an on going goal of developing operational and capital needs
9:56 pm
that prioritizes equity also to better provide a tool of our partnerships division, better match philanthropist with department needs. to inspire stewardship to collaborate more environmental leaders in the equity zone and continue support in equity zones also. finally to inspire a team we are going to take our equity focus analysis and metrix out to staff and increase awareness and understanding of equity along
9:57 pm
with implicit bias. we have already done this this year and it's been a good team enhancing team collaboration. with that, i'm happy to take questions. >> is there any public comment on this item? please come forward. public speaker: commissioners, i am robert bros on the commission from district 8. we got to preview this last week, and it was pretty much the same presentation and the consensus was that the parks department
9:58 pm
had done a great job. i pretty much was the lone dissenting voice. i thought the department could have done a bit more. this is an important opportunity to really nail it down to the little details. i don't think the details were there. in this presentation, tailor has, i feel she already picked what is the basic plan which is table 1, and when i just went through it last week and going through it again at random picking one item off each page, some of it seemed to be taken
9:59 pm
verbatim along the strategic plan, but there could have been goals on who is exactly going to be responsible instead of just the department thing. this is an annual effort. i'm just hoping in the future you can take advantage of this opportunity to maybe bring in a consultant that was suggested. i thought there was a line item in prop b for doing that? i guess not. >> prop b asks for a lot and gives very little. i have reviewed it many times and the work done with the equity metrix and the strategic plan is all great. i understand the spiderweb. it will grow, but i think this particular version seems a little
10:00 pm
bit rushed. for 6 months, it's not bad. once again, thank you, commissioners. >> thank you for taking the time to go through it. >> is there anyone else who would like to make public comment on this item? okay, are being none public comment is closed. >> commissioner low? >> taylor this is a 2-fiscal year look forward, correct? >> correct. >> okay. i just wanted to get that clarified. the agenda language talks about fiscal year 18 and agenda wording in the staff report says fiscal year 17, 18, to fiscal year 18-19. that should be fiscal year 17-18 and fiscal year 18-19. correct? >> correct. >> we are now on a biannual plan so that's why it's connected to the 2
10:01 pm
years. >> it's an operational plan for fiscal year 17-18, and fiscal year 18-19. i don't know why my numerical mind isn't working today. i would like to have this matter moved forward for approval. >> i will second that. >> before we vote, i want to make a comment that one, i think the focus on equity is from prop b is really something that i find very encouraging and starts to filter into operational language and budget language. i think that's terrific. as i read this, i think there is another advantage to it and it could speak to the public comment that was made. that next year, when we look at this, the template is pretty much not going to change that much. it's really being operational and being out there. so, i hope we get the benefit of looking back and looking forward. then i think we are going to get into the weeds more and get into the
10:02 pm
detail that this has the opportunity to present itself with. and, i see mr. ginsberg, did you want to say something before we vote? >> yes, if you don't mind. just to put a bow on this, for many years from this department, we were very reactive responding to the budget crisis of the day and the challenge of the day. and, i think one of the benefits of proposition b and one of the benefits of the good work and the tough decisions we made early on was to give us the space to do more planning. in the last months between the equity update and the operational plan update, that when we come up with you with items that there are an objective to the strategic plan. there has been a lot of planning. i want to thank robert for his,
10:03 pm
for caring about this and for his interest and engagement and for the support. i think our objective is to make this more robust and better, but i do want to pause and really celebrate and thank my staff for embracing this process as much as we have and in particular, this did require a lot of work, but taylor has really been our shepherd. i really want to thank her. this is a 6-month planning cycle with a lot of community feedback and a lot of community engagement. so, while it will continue to evolve and get better over time, i do think it is worth celebrating how far we've come in such a short period of time. >> here, here. >> we have a motion and second. all in favor say, "aye". >> aye. >> any opposed? . the item is approved.
10:04 pm
now we are on item 11. recreation and parks budget for fiscal year 2017-2018 and 2018-2019. >> good morning commissioners, we have already begun or budget process for fiscal year 17-18 and 18-19. i'm here for that official process. i will start with the budget instructions, talk about the positive impacts of proposition b on our budget and then give you a high level overview of expenditures and revenue and the coming budget decision. the 2-year outlook for the city's general fund is once again
10:05 pm
mixed. the mayor's office is predicting that general fund revenues will remain strong with growth of about $144 million next year and $184 million the year after that. but the mayor is also anticipating that growth in expenditures will continue to exceed growth in revenue. over the next 5 years, the mayor's budget office estimates that revenue is going to increase by 11%, while expenditures are going to increase by 29%. so, this presents the mayor's office with an on going challenge as they contemplate balancing the general fund budget. all told, the budget office anticipates a $119 million general fund shortfall next year, an accumulated deficit of $283
10:06 pm
million after that. because of that, the mayor's office is asking the department to reduce their budget. the mayor's budget instruction also asked departments to maintain budgeted employee levels at current year levels. they are looking for no growth in budgeted staff in all departments. >> the great news for recreation and parks is the passage of proposition b and the creation of a general fund baseline exempts the department from making this cut to our general fund. in addition, the new charter language gives the department more control and flexibility in our budget process allows us to budget at least $15 million in general fund annually to fund capital and deferred maintenance whereas in prior years we would have really been at the mercy of
10:07 pm
the mayor's office and the capital planning committee around our general fund capital commission. we have the ability to make a policy decision that we are going to set those dollars aside. additionally, the department is allowed to use growth in our general fund revenue to cover cost and to make budget enhancements. however, with the benefits of the baseline come great responsibilities. we must now absorb all cost increases and revenue changes within our baseline amount. the budget assumes approximately a 3% cola adjustment to salaries in both fiscal years. healthcare is assumed to increase by 7% in each of the next 2 years. retirement is assumed to increase by 2.5% next year and 2 tenths
10:08 pm
of a percent after that and looking to increase a 2% to our work orders. the mayor's office is currently in collective bargaining with the majority of the city's labor union and the cola maya -- adjust a little bit. we shall see. so what does all that mean for the budget in the next 2 fiscal years? so, as of today, the general fund support that's budgeted for recreation and parks in the city's budget system is about $72 million in year one and $60 million in year two. the baseline general fund support available to us next year is almost $71 million and over $73 million in year two. that leaves us with
10:09 pm
just from the get-go, deficit in year one and surplus in year two. but in year two, we need to take into account the fact that we do want a budget of $15 million in capital. we need to account for the fact that we are going to budget equipment at & -- at least $1 million. and we have inflation in our contractual services. our work orders increases and we have some reserves to offset those increases leaving us with a projected deficit about 45,000, and these numbers are a little stale at this point. i had a conversation with mta yesterday and looks like
10:10 pm
union parking garage is going to come in less and it has an impact on our budget and we are looking to a reduction to our budgeted revenue of union square of at least a million dollars and even up to $1.6 million. that is something we are going to have to absorb in these two fiscal years. 2 fiscal years. >> just that garage? >> yes. saint mary's is down a little bit. the size is only about $800,000 where the current one for union square is a million dollars. the reduction in saint mary's is a little less painful. >> is there a prevailing thought about this? >> there is a factor. one is the subway project. that is having a greater
10:11 pm
impact on certainly transient parking than anticipated. the traffic is terrible downtown. they told me that year over year they have seen a $600,000 reduction in revenue from transient parking. there is also some thought that the amount of ride shares, the increase in the use of ride sharing has an impact on the bottom line. that is much more difficult to quantify, but anecdotally that feels true. >> interesting. >> thank you. >> one of the things we ought to think about doing is casting some of those hypotheses with respect to saint mary's to particularly let the ride sharing piece and the union square subway central project, it's just a mess down there. i won't drive down there.
10:12 pm
but, the ride sharing which we talked about, it will be interesting to see. there are several garages in the area, saint mary's is operated by us, but there is another one by the corridor. >> that is an excellent question. >> we might want to convert parking for ride sharing. >> the budget in the current fiscal year is $208.8 million. operating budget of $154 million, the capital budget 54.4 million. the capital budget is pretty high this year. that almost includes almost $20 million from funding from developer fees for market octavia,
10:13 pm
eastern neighborhoods. our capital budget seems to be a little lumpier than other years. this year it's pretty high because of it's action fee revenues. we have 955 budgeted and funded full time equivalent employees in our budget in the current year. the department's budget is supported by 3 primary buckets of revenue. the first is earned revenue at the current year about 28%. 31% of our funded through open space and 41 through our general fund and subsidy savings. >> as you can see the most
10:14 pm
notable fund is the open space fund continues to grow. that is going to be true in the next fiscal years as well. the comptroller's office is working on the 6-month report for the general fund and open space right now so i will have a little more clarity on what the outcome looks like in the next couple of weeks. our general fund subsidy, the growth here in subsidy in 15-16 and 16-17 in proposition b. and this allows us to keep the revenue growth in the revenue savings fund. as you all know, the department has generated revenue from its property and resources to support our operations for many many years. we
10:15 pm
generate revenue from parking garages, from program fees, from permits, rentals of our facilities as well as from our non-general fund sources, the golf fund, the marina fund. the single largest change on this table is really the fact that in the current fiscal year of the stadium, all revenue from the stadium has gone away. which actually you can see really in graph form right here where that drop of about $5 million between 14-15 means we are no longer generating funds from candlestick. >> what happened at
10:16 pm
candlestick when the 9ers left, we negotiated a little bit of a bridge so we didn't lose all of our revenue at once and now we are done. >> in fact the mayor's office back filled most of that loss of candlestick revenue with the general fund. you can see that on the table as well where you can see the candlestick revenue departed, our general fund increased. that included additional general fund that filled in for the fact that stadium revenue went away. roo you can't see it. >> and the big increase in neighborhood and development fund, what accounts for that?
10:17 pm
>> the neighborhood development funds are managed and allocated through a committee process. so the major departments that are the beneficiaries of the neighborhood development plans through recreation and parks, mta, dpw, have representatives that meet with the planning department on a monthly basis looking at revenue that is coming in and revenue projected to come in, and then most of the plan allocates a percentage collected for surface improvement, park and open space. so recreation and parks gets an allocation based on the allocations that are set out in the neighborhood plan. >> to back up a little bit, these are impact fees from developers and depending on the type of project and depending on whether it's in the
10:18 pm
neighborhood plan or a different type of project, there are keys that gets distributed through this process. >> there was a transbay terminal for the fee i would assume that would show up in this anomaly. >> those funds are not for operations, they are for capital. yeah. we are not relying on them for program stuff. >> no, we are not. in fact, the development fees have been tremendously helpful helping us to make better more complete projects. so, for example, martha margaret hayward program project which is a bond project is getting a significant amount from the market octavia plan and will help us do a more comprehensive project to do there than if we only relied on the bond
10:19 pm
funds. >> it was the downtown park funds which is essentially impact fees that we used to redo the clubhouse. >> got it. >> so really they are just part of these projects. you know, so those funds stay with that project. >> so, yeah, so when a developer is doing a project in a certain area, they must pay the city fees and then the fees get allocated to capital improvement to help make that. in many ways, the projects are to help offset the increases in density that these neighborhoods are experiencing as a result of all of this development. >> got it. thank you. >> so just a reminder about how we use our resources. the department spends about half of it's operating budget on
10:20 pm
maintaining our parks and open space. this includes funding to pay for gardeners and custodians, urban forestry, integrated task management. we spend about a third of our budget on recreation programming and that includes all of our programming in our recs centers, in our swimming pools. approximately 11% of our budget on our structural maintenance staff. 7% of our budget on administration and these are all the folks who work for me, it, payroll, contracts, finances, the general manager, prop management, etc. 5% of the budget supports park safety and the two remaining places of the pie support the marina yacht harbor and the zoo as well as planning and volunteer services. >> is park safety separate
10:21 pm
from the salary from the park rangers? >> no, park safety is park rangers. of course the largest single place of this pie is salaries and benefits. nearly two-thirds of the department's budget is towards staff. about 14% of our operating budget funds services that we buy from other departments, sewer water, heat and power, vehicle repairs, city attorney services, workers' compensation, services. a budget allocated to materials and supplies and equipment. and 8% from services from garbage pick up and management. a percent of the budget is allocated for the
10:22 pm
zoo and 4% for the marina loan and the open space revenue bonds and 1% on citywide overhead which is the controllers office and the mayor's operating budget. as discussed earlier, one of the great strengths in my opinion of this great er charter language is looking ahead. as you know, as the charter asks the commission has now approved a strategic plan, capital plan and as of today, an operational plan. the charter intends for each of these documents as well as our equity metrix to guide the development of our budget over the coming fiscal period to the next 2 fiscal years.
10:23 pm
as taylor just discussed the strategic plan outlines our work over a 5-year horizon. the operational plan takes initiatives and objectives from the strategic plan and talks about what we are going to accomplish over the next 2 fiscal years. so, as we build our budget for fiscal year 17-18 and 18-19. we are going to be using the operational plan that you have just approved as our guide for budget. so it's early days yet. we have five whole weeks to figure this out, but i expect that we will be using growth in revenue to address our deficits. right now, i'm hoping to have some additional revenue from
10:24 pm
leases and concessions. a little bit of revenue from programs and then i think the primary resource that we are going to be looking at is the open space fund and growth and open space over the next couple of years. i mentioned in the gm report we are doing two community budget meetings. we are going to have an all staff meeting next week where i will be talking about the budget. we are going to staff for brown bag lunches to talking about the budget. i'm be coming back and talking to the commission two more times. i'm be at prosac in february and a park advocate meeting. as always the budget is due to the mayor's office on february 21st. we have a lot of work to do between now and then and i will certainly be back before you for some
10:25 pm
additional input. i am happy to answer questions. >> thank you. >> is there any public comment on this item? seeing none, public comment is closed. >> commissioner harrison? >> yes, i would like to go back to the full time equivalent. >> sure. >> we have 955 budgeted now and earlier on it was mentioned to discuss retirements. >> we are allowed to back fill positions, we are not just allowed 956. >> that was my point. at some point we'll get back to normal. >> absolutely. commissioner anderson? >> i apologize for asking so many questions. i just want to figure this out. at the first page where you have the
10:26 pm
city general fund outlook. i'm having a hard time reconciling that piece of paper versus the recreation and parks budget. >> so, the city's,
10:27 pm
>> it has to be a race.
10:28 pm
>> the basic budget -- or they have to cut general fund expenditures. >> okay, and you made the point because of these, we don't have to do the 3%? >> precisely. that's the good news. >> got it. >> thank you, commissioner bonilla? >> will the department be required to provide data to the mayor's office on its funding and spending allocations consistent with the equity matrix and/or district by district spending as some departments are being required to do? i don't believe the charter, the charter definitely does not speak to district by district. >> so, commissioner, the way
10:29 pm
that this department has kind of worked through the equity, so don't forget it's hard to have an apples to apples comparison. we went through identifying each own and collect data at how we are doing in equity zones versus citywide. i think that's sort of the approach that we are taking and when we come in and talk about court resurfacing, we are trying to touch on equity parks. >> we have lots of good data right now and we are able to make some pretty good comparisons. i think we are having a tougher time in
10:30 pm
making apples to apples comparison because we have different sizes of parks in different locations. i think the equity framework that we've developed allows us to look at a variety of different metrix some of which, well, you saul -- saw them . there is other data to look at to see how we are doing in equity needs areas. >> the reason i asked is because the department on aging is required to do that, and i just thought, that it would be and for the department on aging is extremely difficult. i thought if that was going to be the requirement of recreation and parks, i would imagine it would be extremely challenging. i was hoping that that would not be the case. >> seeing no other questions, we don't
10:31 pm
need to act on this. the chair will thank katie for the fine presentation. >> we are now on item 12, general public comment continued from item 4. is there anyone who did not speak on item 4 that would like to speak on general public comment? seeing none, the item is closed. item 13, new business, agenda setting, any general public comment. excuse me commissioner? >> i'm sorry, commissioner mcdonnell. >> i don't know whether this is agendaized but i would like an update on the open space and the whole body of the playground. i would just love it. thank you. >> okay. item 14, communications, public
10:32 pm
comment? seeing none. commissioners, this item is closed. item 15, commissioner buell, you have three. >> the chair would entertain a motion to adjourn in lewis lieu and jen mccarty and ms. star. aye. >> thank you, commissioners. [ meeting is adjourned ] sfgov
10:33 pm
begin turn off okay. >> good morning today is wednesday, january 18, 2017, this is the regular meeting the abatement appeals board i would like to remind people to turn off electronic devices first on the agenda is roll call. >> commissioner clinch commissioner walker commissioner gilman commissioner konstin commissioner mccarthy
10:34 pm
commissioner warshell. >> commissioner lee is expected and we have quorum the next item item b the oath will all parties giving testimony please stand and raise your hand do you solemnly swear or affirm the testimony you're about to give will be the whole truth and nothing but the truth? >> yes. >> thank you you may be seated item c approval of the minutes discussion and possible action to adopt the minutes for the meeting held on june 15, 2016. >> is there a motion? >> move to approve. >> is there a second. >> i'll second. >> any any public comment on the minutes all commissioners in favor. >> i. >> opposed? okay. the minutes are approved also wanted to announce for the members of the public here that
10:35 pm
one of our agenda items - it is - what number is that. >> case 2, item number 2 case hill street a request for a continuance and that continuance has been granted is there any members of the public here to speak on that. >> okay. seeing none is there on to new appeals order of abatement case - 6th street honor of record, llc appellant henry the agent action requested by appellant to modify the order of abatement to allow for time to address the pending application through the building department. >> good morning henry for it.
10:36 pm
>> i'm sorry the staff has to present for the record the staff has 7 minutes to address their case and the appellants have 3 minutes and public comment. >> rosemary bosque, chief housing inspector. is a role call vote with 19 gift rooms a legal use and two dwelling units in the december of 2014 based on complachlts from occupants the housing inspected the building a conversion without a permit from the 19 residential gifts rooms to thirty guests room a notice of violation was issued in 2014 substantially in january of 2015 the appellants when ahead and filed a building permit to convert the building back to the last leg use as 19 residential
10:37 pm
guests rooms and two dwelling units that permit was issued and no work outdoor on that through at least two years and then in december this last december a permit was filed to legalize the thirty 0 guest rooms now in looking at the permit history what staff found was that the additional guest rooms came from the conversion of the two dwelling units and some storage rooms it didn't appear from our review that the original 19 residential guests romance were infected, however, we're going on year 3 of this open case filed based on occupant concerns we do feel that since the permit to legalize was filed and now going through the process and it is a form permit to legalize the
10:38 pm
thirty guest rooms this was filed for a cost of $25,000 and it was filed on december 23, 2016, at about the time the previous permit was before to expire i imagine so our concern is one of time and the other issue if we end up with thirty guests rooms instead of 19 dwelling units these will be residential in nature and objective that is something that planning will look at it and review the loss of dwelling units per their policies as well so for us one of a timing issue that the permits out there and want to go ahead and legalize it should have come sooner that's why we're recommending to get the
10:39 pm
pertaining to follow-up one one way or another and get this process addressed commissioner walker. >> yes. thank you for the presentation and the question i have is what is your sense of the timing through planning. >> oh, because a thank you, commissioner because they are proposed to reduce two dwelling units i'm not sure that makes it more complicated because there is a policy regarding the loss of twblz. >> the dwelling units as opposed to the between is the bathrooms and kitchens what is. >> the dwelling units will be self-contained and perhaps my colleague can give you more information we do find that's a great question usually when we are talking about a between defined by the housing it is a
10:40 pm
self-contained unit has a kitchen and bathroom not up to planning code the existence is absent different with that said, sometimes those dwelling units change over a period of time that are managers united within residential hotels where maybe some of the rooms with independent assess from the halfway we felt the considerations that can change over a period this is think one of timing and those become residential guests rooms we've lost the two dwelling units that's the issue for us krnl we have a excess of use that is 19 residential guests rooms and obviously donna what happens with an ultimate building permit. >> is the permit that was taken out to legalize
10:41 pm
residential hotel rooms what is the permit legalizing and the definition i apologize. i have it if you like to see it for the record the where i mean to applications number 2 zero one six plus - it was filed december 23rd it is still ♪ take and it says i'll read it complies with the notice of violations case - convert two residential dwelling units and 19 guest rooms residential hotels to a thirty guest rooms to residential hotel >> so it is not clear from that would be something i couldn't approve watt u without tlook that it comes down to housing we'll look at that and
10:42 pm
planning will have discussions with dbi regarding the issue of the loss of dwelling units first is the residential guest rooms that policy is something we'll be concerned about. >> great. >> commissioner gilman. >> my questions are the current units are different currently opted out. >> i'm not sure. >> people are living there - >> i believe the building is fully opted out but let the folks talk about that. >> i'm surprised what are gender storage closets do we have an accident square footage. >> we did look at the initial set of plans that's formally this particular permit to legalize has not officially come to the housing division we'll look to make sure they have a the minimum square footage under the housing plan and those are
10:43 pm
storage areas they have to have the proper light and ventilation but one of the financier we look at in this situation like this the original residential guest rooms have they been diminished or effected we didn't find that to be the case as it was coming from the dwelling units and storage rooms this is different but definitely to get thirty residential guest rooms that are standard out of there are a couple of things to consider that is the bathrooms and also, because you're going from 19 residential guest romance to beyond 20 residential sprinkler ordinance will apply to this building that's another requirement they have to comply with that's in the staff report. >> commissioner gilman i'm sorry -
10:44 pm
>> excuse me - >> a question. >> i'm not sure if this is our work or planning or the other other the two residential unit are they rent-controlled units. >> i don't know the reason the residential hotel ordinance asks property owners to provide daily logs to the guest rooms and not the united the residential unit sometimes we have allowed rooms to be - dwelling units to be converted into guest rooms that also be used by case management 3 may not be a building that is a nonprofit they look at what helped as far as overall the uses and a provision within the
10:45 pm
field that allows lounges and certain types of open space type of amenities within the building that has to be used exclusive for the residents i don't believe that is proposed we have to type of proposal in the past i don't know exactly if this is opted out historically by the manager or tenants this is something the occupant can tell you. >> in your opinion do you find it unusual for residential hotel not to have a onsite manager. >> well, a, of this size this is a to have onsite management bans chapter 13 of the housing code with respect to that that person didn't necessarily have to live in the between but, live in the guest room over a period
10:46 pm
of years you sometimes see the rooms morphing for us what we're trying to do to make sure that the rooms overall - part of the problem historical used to be called the other bay height in the 80s the inspector and ask for a plan we can't do a one by one comparison but to look at the forefront of the building to get a sense we can't tell one by one and sometimes, the buildings have suits you'll have a cluster of residential guest rooms sometimes you will we're basically looking to see where are the doors between the rooms if they open up and the doors to the hallway what was the between and how - and what is the
10:47 pm
extent of the configuration of the floor plan and how it is used morphing towards an apartment building or a kitchen put in, etc. we found it to be the case more just the rooms and typically give that in some situations but looking to make sure the residential guest romance are preserved and in instances we have long term residential tenant we've done certain special restrictions and recorded some things in case to make sure that as the rooms became available they actually were the room count was brought back so the number of residential guest rooms chapter four 1 will be there >> thank you we'll hear from the appellant now. >> hi for the - this was
10:48 pm
owned by a family and institution and been there also with thurman and so forth and he sold the building so, now those current, llc will change some of the rosemary said you get the suits with two rooms and this opening between the suit not unusual to see residential hotel with a bit of everything and get apartments and dwelling units 3 rooms into a between they've converted thirty residential rooms so the intention to legalize as residential to make the thirty room hotel that's what we're planning to do we have to go through planning and commissioner said yesterday we'll have to a go through a
10:49 pm
conditional use to allow us to change the dwelling units into residential rooms for sro and again that is a mover for the city to have residential because we have a lack of we'll need time to do this and with planning and everything that goes to planning you're looking at 6 months assignment and we'll assess what the planning commission and so forth and like to set this aside the abatement for 6 to 9 months to have enough time to grow planning and get it done we're working on it. >> commissioner walker. >> yes. thank you sir, i have a couple of requests when did the current owners purchase the building. >> two years ago. >> and they did all the
10:50 pm
converting themselves. >> i had that i don't think so if they did it or the rcs i wasn't involved i have a feeling this was the way to go and wait a minute we have an issue that came up. >> with this permit that is applied for the plans do they inclusive the upgrades necessary to accommodate thirty rooms with the sprinkles and open space all of that is included. >> correct. >> in the current plan. >> yes. >> okay. he think that's it for me right now. >> commissioner gilman. >> sir do you know from the rooms are cumber opt out or not opted out. >> i believe their opted out. >> just to follow the logic the rooms are illegal opted out.
10:51 pm
>> i understand. >> your role i'm trying any concern we have folks living in a dangerous situation in the rooms are not permitted. >> i don't think interest is an issue otherwise would have had a complaint to look at those are rooms not standard living and vacate them i don't believe that condition exists. >> have the rooms been inspected for safety concerns. >> yes. we did when we did the notice of violation the inspectors went through the building we did not see an issue with short-term rentals more of a long term or more of a proximity type of rental not necessarily tairth the low income but that was not an issue conversion from the - a
10:52 pm
questions are those residential rooms or tourist rooms. >> residential absolutely. >> getting clear. >> thank you. >> did the department want to use the rebuttal? >> just briefly again as far as the timeframe we believe that it is appropriate in this instance to get the order of abatement recorded to compel the pertaining to go through the process we're two years down the road and could a have a permit they had the one permit issued set out this for two years and now two years later want to do this that's fine with more residential guest rooms that's great but make sure they go through the process i have the employment mechanism to get the order recorded.
10:53 pm
>> the issue with that so that causes a cloud on title so when it comes to funding to do the rest of this work it needs to be done that will impact it and make it tough to do that with that said, once a cloud it is hard to get funding to get the funding for the project so that's what we're stuck with not hope not to go through that. >> if i can ask a question about that, sir. >> so it is that the banks don't are less likely to lend money or charge a higher rate and they won't give you money you'll have to have money out of our pocket to do this. >> thank you.
10:54 pm
>> any public comment sierra president walker. >> i think this is one of the cases we can recognize that it might take a while to get approval from planning i move to uphold the order of abatement allow them time to complete the project and put a stake in the ground. >> any other comments from the commissioners sounds like a motion. >> oh, sorry commissioner gilman. >> if that's a motion i second the motion. >> it was a motion 0 there is a motion that has been seconded to uphold the order of abatement and hole it in abeyance for 12 months a roll call vote.
10:55 pm
>> commissioner clinch commissioner walker commissioner gilman commissioner konstin commissioner lee commissioner mccarthy commissioner warshell. >> okay. the that item passes unanimously item 3 case santiago street owner of record phil daily. >> thank you, commissioners. >> responding daily action by appellant the order of abatement be reversed. >> staff present. >> good morning joe duffy dbi this case is an appeal that is the complaint for property
10:56 pm
address an santiago street - the appellant is mr. r07bd daily the building description a two-story with a wood-frame building legal use a single-family dwelling this is the notice of violation was issued for failure to comply with the vacate building ordinance the violations are outstanding and life saved hazards and directors hearing with the 2016 the result was an order of abatement issued with conditions submit the vacant or abandoned building and pay all the associated fees and/or penalties and comply with the ordinance the permanent activity are permit activity on this address
10:57 pm
the order of abatement number is - the case history on the violations like a timeline 326, 2016 first notice of violation posted, 4, 25 second notice of violation and 5, 29 a notice was made and 11 the directors hearing was posted a continuance granted on the 24 of may an order of abatement was issued been the 11 of july and the order of abatement was mailed and it was posted and then we had the abatement of appeals was fined and staff recommendation uphold the order of abatement and oppose the costs just by reading the brief i'm hearing the project o property this is a vacant be building we received a
10:58 pm
complaint from a neighbor about the building and have an outstanding case for the same on 2015 this is an annual thing that is outstanding with the department and i've gone through code compliant and in 2014 and one abated so the property owner had it taken care of in 2015 or 2016 this case is wragd only the 2016 i have an assessment the annual fee is seven hundred plus when you multiple that by 9 the penalty fees will be the times and there are code enforcement costs i think about 12 hundred plus so - seem available for any
10:59 pm
questions. >> commissioners, any questions. >> through the chair so i understand that 2014 was abatement. >> yes. i reviewed that morning and sometimes, i look at the complaint i like to see what is opened and closed in 2014 it appears we did actually write a notice of violation for that and it went through a second one and through the chair actually so - yeah, the 2014 case was abated and received application in check by mail process a check for 2014 on the order of restoration that went through a second notice i'm not sure what the fee waltz but the case was abated. >> that was the first.
11:00 pm
>> 2014. >> so they reshld in 2016. >> looks like that, yes yes. >> commissioner warshell. >> do we know how long the owner had this property and how long it's been unoccupied. >> i don't know the answer to that question. >> thank you. >> if no future questions for the department will the appellant come up please. >> good morning my name is ronald daily i'm a partial owner the building and appellant ♪ matter >> - the main problem is i own that building with my brother
11:01 pm
and for many years my brother wanted to sell the building and he wanted to renovate it and rent it on april or may of last year my brother agreed to sell his half of the building to a friend of mine they were trying to get a loan on the property but based on the condition of the property basically, the only thing wrong with the property is dry rot on the front of the building that shows up in the living room it is basically on that basis the building is urban inhabitable the lender would lend because of the condition we have gotten - we've been dealing with a mortgage broker for quite sometime within the last month and a half or so he's
11:02 pm
come up with a hard moneylender that will lend money and in fact, they've been ready to fund any time i asked them to put it off to february 1st to clear up the matters and wait for the weather to improve in san francisco we don't get rain all the time like we've had in the last couple of months but i was waiting just to february to have the loan funded the lenders says they can't fund the loan unless the city subordinates their lien the lien was recorded on december 2nd it was the result of a november 4th hearing i attended directors hearing at that hearing the director gave me thirty days to correct the problems and then they
11:03 pm
recorded the deed before - record the notice of abatement before the thirty days were up that notice of abatement is recorded and the lender wouldn't lend unless the city subordinates i talked wisamuel y he says it's out of his purview i spoke with mr. hinge and said i'll have to post dollars $10,000 i feel that is opening for quite sometime if you read any presentation i offered as an amendment or addition to number
11:04 pm
4 in my appeal it includes a definition by richard b sandra supreme court justice on the definition of property i understand the city's right and responsibility for hazards and public trust and things like that at one that that was earlier last year in april or may the city healthy contacted my brother to correct the over growth of foliage at the property and at the hearing on june 28th of last year, i - told mr. sweeney that he said the building has not been maintained i tell him yes. that had been maintained and offered
11:05 pm
him the correction of the overgrowth of foliage which was abated and written off by the health department and tell me that i didn't have any evidence and he didn't have any evidence in the record that had took place their records are a little sketchy the department so they tell me i have letters that told me i was not present at the- it says the business owner didn't attend the hearing on may 24th of 2016 which i did attend and they said another that i didn't attend the hearing on 6 slashing 28 i a recorded of hearing and
11:06 pm
they also said the business owner didn't attend the november 4th hearing or the october 4th - i don't know which one but i was there on november 4th and they said i didn't attend that hearing either we have a problem a little bit of - the dbis requirements the main issue is as i see that correction to the problem we or willfully now and able my brother is willing to sell his half a lender that is willing to lend if they did city will subordinate the loan i'll get the permits to do the work immediately. >> no further comment we'll go you have time but you'll have a chance to do rebuttal. >> fine okay. >> any questions from the
11:07 pm
commissions before we go on. >> is the department ready to make their rebuttal? >> commissioners not a word of any efforts on that subordination that would have been done by code enforcement i did what i did not involved with dbi on that process but i know folks are available i'm sorry it will be worked out i have photographs from the property can i have the overhead, please? this is a photography saw an earlier photograph we cleaned up on the front let me put it the other way maybe easier - nope
11:08 pm
so as you can see it is boarded up this area previously was all weeds and stuff and cleaned up the windows are boarded up this is pretty vacant building and some photographs. >> let me get clear they've not filled the vacant building ordinance requirement. >> not yet no. >> for 14, 15 and 16. >> 15 and 16 their outstanding the 2015 cases have moved the code enforcement maybe to the next step that would be the city attorney litigation that's the next one. >> the outstanding fees are just a little bit over seven hundred before we 9 times it. >> right 711 and cause for code enforcement. >> it is 13 hundred. >> i have on the folder that i have.
11:09 pm
>> okay. thank you. >> more pictures. >> commissioner konstin. >> is that the lien amount. >> no. >> what's the lien amount. >> the lien amount i don't have that. >> it's there was confusion over the 15 cases i don't have that. >> the 2015 case was resolved by the order of abatement which then liens against the property not that case. >> yes. the 2016 case that's still outstanding according to the records other than the gentleman mentioned there was an error on one of the letters he was not presented at the hearing that's correct. he was present and error and it was corrected by the order of abatement the order of abatement states that the owner was represented that was corrected at a later time this
11:10 pm
was an error and a letter sent to the property owner he was at the hearing. >> and a follow-up he mentioned something about the order of abatement was issued before the thirty day limit do you know anything about that. >> i don't have that i've got everything i have the folders it has all the recordings and posts and registered everything to it seems to me from reading on the complaint that i've reviewing the file from code enforcement that everything was done in in accordance with the procedures and that stalls everything the appeal so nothing done with the order in pending - >> commissioner mccarthy. >> i'm kind of more direction but a more questions commissioners any testimony for
11:11 pm
this is that a loounl i'm the fact in 2014 that was mitigated we're dealing with 16 and 14 and 15 as well; right? 0 i'm on one hand to any fellow commissioners an opportunity based on the fact that a lot will happen in february or late february and understanding i want to know about the testimony kind of rings real - if mr. daily will be open to or the commissioners open to a reduction in fees to make that doable contingent with something happens in february or march with regards it looks like he has the ownership started i'm
11:12 pm
wondering if any suggestions as to what our perimeters are there and reduction of fees here make this for doable for mr. daily. >> vice president walker. >> i was looking at that eliminating the 9 times fee if there's a willingness to pay the actual costs we've incurred to submit the necessary application and fees for the two years ago of vacant building ordinance requirements that's what i would say is fair and as long as that happens then the department can do what needs to happen to facilitate in moving forward with permits to do what they want i mean ultimately to restore this building to use i mean, i think that is a fair
11:13 pm
resolution of covering our costs and . >> we'll have to honor the kind of the policy which is - >> yeah. for the two years. >> for the two years. >> and i don't know - the department was contacted by neighborhoods to obviously there are people living around that and tired of the problem. >> it is a policy that you know took a long time and it works sometimes, i think that is misunderstood on the consequences of that. >> i think that is working very well on the ordinance we handed this and most people comply with the fee it is what it is. >> if we could do some math and compose that as a resolution i'll be for that. >> i suspect mr. lourey.
11:14 pm
>> good morning dan lourey and recommend the building be properly secured we have vagrant and complaint from the supervisors. >> okay. thank you. >> so as there's commissioner warshell. >> i think he has a - >> please. rebuttal for 3 minutes. >> question this last gentleman that spoke asked the building be secured the building is secured in fact, he secured it before the december 2nd filing of t filing order of abatement was filed premove to approve before the 11, 4, 16 hearing i was a little bit confused and still am
11:15 pm
i'm not sure you people have it clear as to when the matter of the registration the registration was paid by my brother in 14 owe won't have paid the registration based on the definition of property that richard b sandra of the supreme court came up with a vacant building didn't necessarily become a nuisance because it's vacant a nuisance in the direction didn't come under vacant building that building was a nuisance because of people were entering that squatters and that's why i secured the building i felt that was made sure to skewer the building at one time the police said it
11:16 pm
needed to be secured i felt that was right to be asked you that is totally secured and no problems with squatters for quite sometime i'm in the process of attempting to purchase the building from the lender will lend from the city will subordinate their lien i will get the money and pay my brother and get the permits and do the work i mean we don't have too much of a except - i have a friend that lives in arizona and moves to washington if he lived in san francisco he would have to buy a vacant building registration permit for the 6
11:17 pm
months he went to arizona but it is just - it is not comprehensible how i mean the city has a responsibility and i understand the issues mayor ed lee and my right to own a building and not have that be a nuisance or breeding ground for raccoons and rats and mice it's not that's where i stand on this. >> thank you. >> thank you, mr. daily. >> can i ask you who the gentleman that gentleman i like to know his nail from dbi. >> mr. duffy. >> mr. duffy. >> thank you. >> my name is joe duffy dbi and i believe that mr. daily has a problem i'm joe duffy dbi
11:18 pm
senior building inspector in the belief you couldn't understand mr. hinge at the hearing - okay. >> it is i think commissioner warshell has a comment or question. >> just a comment i've lived near buildings that are not opt out for a long time and i'll familiar with the effect on the desire neighborhood when supervisors and police are constantly called in this security a breached and occupied by squatters that present safety risk one might say that is even devalues the
11:19 pm
surrounding properties and the quality of life of all of his neighbors so while i respect individual people's property rights i certainly understand that we live in communities and have standards by which we have to conform to be civil to the neighbors of our community i think that is primarily what this registration is about so that when property isn't occupied it registered with the city so it can be evaluated if it is security and condition do not impose undue hardship on the entire community it certainly appears this is an example of a building that has done that and while i appreciate
11:20 pm
the comments that revolving the issues to move forward and solve the problem and create a condition whereby the owner is able to secure the financing to do the buy out and improvements that's our goal having an occupiab occupiable housing unit i disagree when a property has been in neglect and knowingly because of an owner interpretation of law so
11:21 pm
disagrees with our law he chooses not to follow it i think that is precisely why penalty are there and i more one disagree this penalty shouldn't be assessed seems like a poster child why you would i think we have to send a message to property owners who choose to do this should this property owner appeal the law he was recourse through the court if he feels this is illegal but as the law stands as i understand this is exactly the circumstance under which this should be applied. >> what's the fee for registering a have a doubt building.
11:22 pm
>> $711 annual fee. >> if 23 if that are paid we wouldn't be here i need to say i agree with any fellow commissioner i don't feel comfortable waving the increase do we have the right to lower it does that have to be 9 times. >> commissioner walker we have the economy to work with the fees we'll recognize 2015-2016 and we'll recognize that that seven hundred and 10 accrued fees. >> 13 hundred. >> that will stay in place we wouldn't do is charge the 9 times. >> 9 times the 7, 11. >> that's. >> only if they had the work. >> only if they do the work
11:23 pm
what resonates is the concentration it was paid in 2014 with the brother and then i think there was a bit of separation i think this has been sort of out now so i can see a situation where they ignored not smartly but understanding the complications of someone and trying to doing the right thing that's the fairest option up to the commission. >> as a chief builder inspector he's here and how the fees are made up if you or willfully to listen to that. >> perfect. >> commissioner gilman do you want to say anything first. >> i had further questions. >> good morning commissioner patrick reardon talking about a
11:24 pm
2016 case before you there are fees associated with that we have the fee as 7, 11 for the registration the penalty is 9 times, we have about $1,240 in assessment fees think this case in 2016 case and we're also discussing a case that is from 2030 that already has an order of abatement so i building those i don't know exactly with the assessments are we didn't prepare that case we're dealing with different one today, we know there are 9 times on the 7, 11 and assessment that will at least be 1240 plus additional monuments required for the order of abatement that is already in place on that case so. >> so to clarify we're only here to look at 2016 this is 9 times that is seven hundred not
11:25 pm
14 hundred. >> correct the case is for the 2016 case. >> thank you. >> vice president walker. >> the order of abatement on the 2015 is the order that is lien; is that correct. >> correct. >> and none are captured that's why we need because that abatement or order activated. >> that is an annual requirement. >> yes. >> the 2016 case. >> i i get it but the 2016 an order of abatement issued anticipate a lien was put on the property because of lack of filing and payment and all of that we're in 2016 with the same set of issues - that are separate from but in addition to. >> commissioner gilman. >> sorry do we have the authority to the require from the appellant we roach the lien
11:26 pm
if we're only hearing 2016 we not in a position to remove that. >> i don't know that's something. >> that's what we're here to talk about the 2016 on. >> we have the ability to negotiate the fee. >> only the 2016 case. >> i'll make the argument on 2016 that obviously the same argument what go made for the 2030 a i don't think. >> the attorney. >> that order of abatement is issued. >> water if under the bridge. >> okay. >> the 2016 is the cased before us. >> it's not calendared i think it is also a sunshine issue we'll not delusively into that this is only 2016. >> right. >> i was in receipt of phone
11:27 pm
calls for the security of the building in october and i was provided with some picture evidence of some nefarious activity one the building i have to say a neighbor i'll be concerned if i was aware of what was going on with the building the pd was involved and the supervisor was contacted we were scheduled inform a task force inspection in november which we attended and didn't get assess he believe another task force inspection is for the 25 so my concern is the security of building in regards to the safety of the neighbors. >> thank you. >> i think unless mr. duffy has something - >> the 2015 case had not been
11:28 pm
referred to the city attorney's office. >> any any public comment? seeing none, any commissioners want to make a motion. >> (inaudible). >> i'm sorry mr. daily it is over. >> wait a minute, wait a minute i gave any rebuttal. >> exactly. >> you're bringing people back up here they say things that gentleman said things i didn't is a chance to comment on what he said. >> i'm sorry mr. daily that's the way the process is set up each party has 7 minutes and 3 minutes and 3 minutes. >> wait a minute no, no i got it 7, 7, 3 and 3 after mr. duffy spoke i spoke that was my 3 and bring up 3 more witnesses. >> we have questions about the fees accrued and process questions we needed to know we
11:29 pm
can make our decision. >> yeah. but half of what they said didn't have too much value willed. >> it goes to the court. >> the court thank you. >> thank you. >> any motion like to be offered sir, i'm sorry. >> i want the minutes for this meeting. >> they'll be published. >> they'll be published and this is also on video recorded sfgovtv on video so will be in the website thank you. >> (inaudible). >> you'll receive them it will take time but you'll be able to get the minutes. >> thank you. >> do you have a card.
11:30 pm
>> yes. >> while sonya is looking commissioner warshell. >> i move the $711 and fees plus 9 times penalty be enforced. >> is there oscar pistorius rebuttal. >> may i clarify including the 13 hundred - >> yes. assessment costs. >> thank you for the clarification. >> i tend to think that all of the evidence that has been submitted supports that motion. >> there is been disregard for the rules your department has gone out of its way to work with this business owner and i think that it is clear no interest in complying so i agree i think
11:31 pm
this this year inform folks that infrastructure grantly disregard the rules all the community suffers. >> i'll offer a different motion i don't know the protocol but on the first one it is up to the commission. >> i believe if we want resolution it about likely not occur if we apply if so we'll move on i would make a motions to uphold the order of abatement to assess the fees minus the 9 multipleer. >> second. >> what do we do now. >> call the first one and second one and vice president walker. >> i think that the second one only make sense it is not complied with the times the fee
11:32 pm
applied. >> maybe give thirty days or 60 days for the person to pay the fines that are applicable to the case and work through the resolution and if they don't we add a 9 times fee. >> commissioner gilman. >> and i apologize is this the only resolution paying off the lien i know - >> so i said that but i guess i don't understand i'm asking a question i apologize for any ignorance i don't see how he can get financing and buying his brother out wears sort of saying he is has as major roadblock we're not discussing today we building that having faith he'll be able to buy his brother out and he is complying with 2015 it is ill logic.
11:33 pm
>> it may not be feasible. >> i don't see how we can move forward with the lease it is predicted on financing. >> commissioner mccarthy. >> so your that the commissioner gilman i was under the impression we can do 2015 we cannot because of mitigation so that's going to send fees a cloud will stay there that is absent opportunity to reduce the fees and ask him to pay the rate for which is $711 and the 13 hundreds dollars that's what we're negotiating to a fair resolution for the 2016 with the caveat this is not you know give one chance to fee that's the chief administrative officer y09 not honored whatever then we'll go back to the 9 times.
11:34 pm
>> can you indulge me. >> it is didn't change the financing it is resolved by him mitigating the fines that's the only way it will be done. >> i guess i appreciate why do we do that back in 2016 this was received to the city attorney's office the gentleman as disregard assembly $700 my understanding is the filing fees for the elevated single-family home why would we come in - we have a cloud if we didn't have the 2016 that makes sense to move forward and river the situation no way for him to do that all we're doing a banking
11:35 pm
on receiving a payment of 13 hundred in fees and the filing fee and we're saying basically - beyond our generosity in this situation. >> commissioner gilman we're done down to the individual commission it is well articulated why would we do that i'm speaking for myself after listening to the presentation and understanding the dynamics of the situation there is an issue of him not fully understanding the applications by ignoring it i'm convinced of that and i think at many levels he wants to do the right thing and mr. daily has shown frustration with the dbi and the policies and i think i'm willing to recognize that and kind of give him one more opportunity to do the right thing on the 2016
11:36 pm
versus 15 but i keep on stressing we have basis over the years we shouldn't and i think the testimony and the further testimony with the partnership with his brother he's trying to get the money together and with the caveat if they didn't honor the 2016 back to us and policies are 9 times so - >> giving him a little bit of grace on this first one but the second one no. >> i'd like to call the two questions sonya if you could do that two motions. >> i don't exactly know what they are. >> if commissioner warshell desire both on the motion or withdraw. >> i request to vote on it. >> sonya repeat it. >> your motion is basically to uphold the order of abatement.
11:37 pm
>> uphold the order of abatement and as commissioner walker mentioned the 12 hundred and plus assessment fees. >> and delivery 9 times the multiplier. >> to uphold the original order of abatement including all assessment costs and fees so i'll reenforcement. >> commissioner clinch. >> no president walker yes. >> commissioner gilman. >> commissioner konstin commissioner lee no commissioner mccarthy. >> no commissioner warshell. >> that motion carries 4 toe 3 so that's it.
11:38 pm
>> to that's - >> that's it next case. >> next case items e-1 to e-2 shall be heard together one request a rehearing bay street originally heard and decided 2016 and item two possible rehearing of case the action requested by appellant should request for a rehearing. >> commissioners rosemary bosque, chief housing inspector. as you may recall in november in details vested the issue with the represent tallies at the roof of 2185 bay street with a
11:39 pm
24 unit building for your information i have two photographs the bottom and the upper what done in morning as you can see not much change in our view from the perspective that the appellants who is the tenants as you may recall has not supplied in any new information from a structural stand point that will necessitate a rehearing we believe that the rehearing shouldn't occur on the basis of that thank you. >> okay commissioners personally this will be a brief hearing from what you've been through this morning appreciate our patience that of those a correct summary where we were in november i think you'll remember we talked about the interplay a
11:40 pm
relationship two the landlord/tenant it is and play between the city and property owner that not the one that causing the problems and the rights of tenant due to the this part of the his livelihood with the health diet and part of his teachers for others you voted to uphold and it is if we can come to resolution to the credit of both parties the landlord/tenant expressed an interest in doing so we hit a barrier immediately the barrier the land feels hamstrung by the last hearing he feels there is findings of the fact by this board that on the question of whether they are talking about a rooftop garden i addressed that but didn't building any findings was made
11:41 pm
the finding is important because it changes the minimum structure load if 20 pound per square footage to one hundred pound per square feet the structural engineer report from the landowner assumed this is a roasted garden and with his ensure but assuming it hits the included it didn't meet the standard for one square feet pound per square feet members of the department of building inspection we've been speaking to think in question this is an unoccupied escape area not a rooftop garden not inviting people to change out but for access for regular maintenance for growing food supplements for healthy lifestyle the base should apply
11:42 pm
with a rehearing briefing address that the fact from the international building code and other building code make a distinction between a rooftop garden and there are no local amendment that speak to this so the california and international blavd is binding and identical they anticipate the maintenance for this when they have the lower 20 the question of people going on the roof to change things that's not the issue it is anticipated as an unoccupied landscape area if this determination can be accomplished the safety question that was transit first by the notice of violation is not an issue the alternative what we've asked for to hold the order of abatement in abeyance for 90
11:43 pm
days and let us pursue a motion for the left hand and attendants everybody is willing to do that if we're hamstrung by on erroneous determination we're talking about a rooftop garden and have to meet the residents that shouldn't apply to what it this is an unoccupied landscape ear it is cost profitable we'll not come to a solution and further frustrated by the fact fees are assessed to the property owner when he hadn't violated anyone's concerns other than to honor the tenant agreement with this tenant if uniform indulge us i have copies of the international building code and california building code i think you said what the issue is here we would like to address this situation to maintain the status quo we have ideas of using smaller bins no
11:44 pm
concern about the load exceeding something what it is now and concern about a lid coming off we'll chain them and satisfied with the satisfaction of the city but we need to be freed from this barrier that has been at least the landlords believes that is characters as a finding find fact by this board we're dealing with a rooftop garden. >> any questions for the appellant? >> thank you for your time. >> does the department anything to say. >> the charactertion shotgun what an erroneous findings we don't believe that is correct and not just mayor ed lee ohio
11:45 pm
putting a chaining lid is a concern no sdmisht of we're told is personal use we have the overall concerns that he addressed before so on the basis we don't say additional information from the structural engineer we too building a rehearing is necessary or warranted. >> for rosemary see if you are recall what happened i think the reasons for holding the order of abatement was not because of a load issue are a weight factor it was an unpermitted item about the roof wasn't it regardless of
11:46 pm
how heavy those bins were or how many they were unpermitted on the roof. >> i can't say you took the motion a total outlet of informs from the deputy director seeing none, with the report that talked about the load he obviously the total outlet of the testimony i would leave it to your office to characterize our action. >> commissioner gilman. >> my understanding is the same as commissioner lee we made that decision that was unpermit and unsafe we heard no fire exit and no fire escape with the rain and winds we'll have more concerns no change in the load on the roof we've heard from staff concerns things rolling off the roof it
11:47 pm
is unusual with this weather pattern not changing any time soon and adds to any concerns we could be looking at more liability and risk to the citizens of the san francisco than before. >> commissioner mccarthy. >> just rosemary if i may because i had a lot of trouble i concur that note not designed but can you talk a little bit about one unoccupied landscape area. >> have you - do we have a code where we stand as the department and so on. >> i would defer to deputy director screening with the housing a permitted type of situati situation. >> my take on the code a permit
11:48 pm
will having to be taken out to something other than a roof deck i seem to remember at the last hearing concerns about fire access that there was concerns about people going up through to tend the garden no guardrail to keep them on the roof and there would be some sort of a permit required to keep this situation the way it is and that has not been applied for . >> so what they're asking for today to kind of look at something like that come back to us with to make this. >> that is up- >> this is an application for rehearing. >> the 90 days the rehearing and 90 days contact to us.
11:49 pm
>> nothing submitted that was not submitted i mean. >> i want to be transparent as possible i want to understand this code they brought up at that stage i want to make sure we as a department are kind of up to speed and the correct is not correct to me that's new information been brought forward. >> if i can interject i'm familiar with the code. >> i'm not aware of that in the code the landscaping really - it really is not a building issue unless you bring it to a roof we have green roof and drainage for the grand. >> nothing changes the way i see that roof not based on if
11:50 pm
look right not designed. >> the roof is not - >> (multiple voices). >> i want to be sure we're not missing something here. >> i don't believe we are the roof. >>was not if i remember right it is >> what will the 90 days give us what will be different other than the fact there is - >> we have to rehear it. >> i understand that but is - >> commissioners if i may we haven't heard this is for tenant we don't know from the property owner about do something like that perhaps. >> he's here can we bring up the pertaining to come up i believe he's present over here. >> can you come up so we can ask you. >> questions.
11:51 pm
>> so question of order should we have the appellant give their rebuttal and ask for public comment perhaps includes the property owner is that the order of things so the appellant can please come up. >> the copy of the international building code section 1607 plus talks about the occupiable roofs and further down talk about landscape roofs and as you can see they talk about the rooftop gardens or general assembly inviting people to hang out on the rooftop one hundred pound per square feet when you talk about a sclarptd
11:52 pm
roof they make a distinction and it is a 20 pound per square feet if you look at the notes flatter highlighted in yellow the words is covering it but it says i'll pull this up they consider in this load the ideas there will be conscionable people up there for maintenance all right. at the last hearing we submit in writing something from the planning department and there's no permit for an uncupidity landscape area a permit for a roof line garden we'll be held to a standard of one per square feet unites i that's not appropriate this is new information if people don't understand the california building codes i have a copy of that as well that was given to us by tom lee
11:53 pm
it says this is an unoccupied landscape area and it says the uniformed load in an unoccupied landscape roofs shall be 20 that's why i'm asking this the result of the directors hearing the inability to convince the hearing officer of this definition didn't want to hear it now you're raising legitimacy concerns of safety about the wind and rain i have to you mention being a lawyer saying a due process in the in the notice of violation those things can be addressed if we work together with the left hand and city worked with planning a fan of the garden as it is and address the other concerns but to hold this abatement will send us to
11:54 pm
superior court to show the leg shotgun for the the subject property and the concerns the the lids those were not in the notice of violation the notice of violation was stabbing this was a safe load the roof was save to handle the load on this that's been established by everybody what they're saying things can happen that can change that that's beyond the purview where we are today thank you. >> mr. sweeney. >> international building code and california building code on the you'll construct something a thirty gallons of soil up on a roof it is you'll have to build the roof that roof was not built for this purchase purpose in an
11:55 pm
existing building the california building code is for the old buildings rather than chapter 34. >> thank you. >> it says if he could go to public comment perhaps any commissioners have any questions for the appellant. >> public comment. 3 minutes. >> or perhaps invite you up for of point of order sonya. >> the building isn't he part. >> he's the attorney. >> you were here. >> do you solemnly swear or affirm the testimony you're about to give will be the whole truth and nothing but the truth? >> yes. >> thank you. >> i'm jonathan counsel for the property owner actually after the. >> speak into the microphone please. after the last hearing excuse me
11:56 pm
- the next day we approached i sent an e-mail to counsel for the tenant you know saying we're interested in trying to resolve this and for a variety of reasons that has not happened like at this point any clients concern and has been throughout after the last hearing we asked the tenant to within a week to remove what is on the roof pending you know hopefully working a resolution he wouldn't do it and had a long hard talk with any client with liability issues and strurj there could be structural problems we're not aware of any and the garden it up there for awhile may be one or two months won't make a difference he was willing to make that risk and with the
11:57 pm
weather he's concerned about the 90 days you know, i think eventually from everything i've heard from the tenants counsel is it if if it will be in supreme court and my inclination that he will - it will happen soornl any client has stooped from the violation many, many landowner would do so you know we've bent over backwards but concerns about another 90 days. >> thank you any other public comment. >> seeing none, commissioner walker. >> vice president walker. >> i move to deny rehearing. >> second. >> okay there is a motion that
11:58 pm
has been seconded to deny the appeal for rehearing i'll take a roll call vote. >> no new information so - >> okay commissioner clinch vice president walker. >> commissioner gilman obtaining stain. >> yes or no. >> get me and come back. >> commissioner konstin commissioner lee commissioner mccarthy commissioner warshell. >> commissioner gilman. >> yes. >> that item passes unanimously. >> item f general public comment is there any general
11:59 pm
public comment for items not on the abatement appeals board agenda and item g a motion to adjourn. >> move to adjourn. >> second. >> all in favor, say i. >> i. >> we're not adjourned that is 10:31 a.m. we will take a 10 minute recess and reconvene as the building inspection
12:00 am
>> good afternoon, everyone and welcome to the tuesday, january 10, 2017, board of supervisors meeting welcome to your new it colleagues supervisor sandra fewer supervisor ahsha safai and conceptually welcome to the this is not our first meeting your second welcome and it the returning members with that, madam clerk please call the roll. >> and supervisor president london breed supervisor cowen supervisor farrell supervisor fewer


info Stream Only

Uploaded by TV Archive on