Access Appeals Commission
DEPARTMENT OF BUILDING INSPECTION
City & County of San Francisco
1660 Mission Street, San Francisco, California 94103-2414
ACCESS APPEALS COMMISSION
MINUTES
Wednesday, April 25, 2001
1:00 P.M.
City Hall
1 Dr. Carlton B. Goodlett Way, Room 416
1. CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL
The regular meeting of the Access Appeals Commission President Lim called to order at 1:10 PM.
COMMISSION MEMBERS PRESENT: Ms. Enid Lim, President Ms. Enid Lim, Vice-President
Mr. Francis K. Chatillon, Vice-President
Ms. Roslyn Baltimore
Ms. Alyce G. Brown
Mr. Linton Stables III
COMMISSION MEMBERS ABSENT: None
CITY REPRESENTATIVES: Mr. Rafael Torres-Gil, DBI
Ms. Susan Pangilinan, DBI
Ms. Miriam Stombler, Deputy City Attorney
Ms. Doris M. Levine, Reporter
Mr. Jim Whipple, Building Inspector
2. PUBLIC COMMENT:
There was no public comment.
Public comment was closed.
3. APPROVAL OF MINUTES:
A unanimous vote by the commissioners approved the minutes for the commission hearing of December 13, 2000.
4. REVIEW OF COMMUNICATION ITEMS:
There were no items for review by the commission.
5. NEW APPEALS:
a. Appeal No. 01-01 (PA #200102283103) 899 Howard Street Mr. Lou Felthouse
The summary of the appeal was presented by Rafael Torres-Gil, Secretary to the AAC.
Presentation by Mr. Lou Felthouse, Architect, for the appellant, IRP Yerba Buena Properties.
Comments by Mr. Norman, representative for Shoe Pavilion.
Comments by Ms. Susan We??? regarding the ramp and the 5th St. entry.
Commissioner Stables inquired why the Department would consider the 5th St. entry a secondary entry. R. Torres-Gil indicated that DAD regarded this determination mistaken and that the AAC summary considered this entry one of two primary entrances. Commissioner Stables also inquired if the bottom landing can be on public property. Inspector Whipple indicated that the sidewalk can be used as a bottom landing.
Commissioner Baltimore inquired about the use of automatic doors at the top of the landing.
Mr. Felthouse responded in detail about the various ramp/landing/door configurations and future plans proposed in the next four years when complete modifications will occur.
Commissioner Stables inquired about possible structural floor modifications, beam sizes and the aesthetics of the floor plan.
Comments by Bruce Oka, a disabled rights advocate. He is not opposed to the appeal. He is basically opposed to anything that is mechanical and requires maintenance, would prefer the onetime expenditure for a ramp and wants proper maintenance during the hours of operation.
Mr. August Longo spoke against this application. He said that Shoe Pavilion is a destination business that advertises extensively. The immediate area also has many disabled persons. If the appeal is approved he requests a large bond be required.
Mr. Turner, a managing partner of the building, spoke of the desire to have the board accommodate
a short-term solution for disabled access to the building.
Public Comment was closed
Commissioner Baltimore said that this is a reasonable solution for 4 ½ years and has conditions that are traditionally attached to these types of appeals.
Commissioner Baltimore presented a motion to approve the appeal with conditions.
Conditions:
$ The lift is approved for a four and one-half year period.
$ The lift be enclosed for protection against the elements.
$ A maintenance contract must incorporate inspection of the lift every three (3) months.
$ Appropriate handicapped signage be installed.
$ That the building owner/ manager conduct a functional inspection not less that once a week to confirm that the lift is operational and that a log be available for review by anyone who wishes to see it. A checklist must be incorporated into this inspection.
$ Installation of battery backup power.
$ Installation of power door/gate operators at each landing.
$ The maintenance contract must have a 24 hour response time for service calls so that the lift is not out of operation for more than one day.
President Lim Aye
Vice President Chatillon Nay
Commissioner Baltimore Aye
Commissioner Brown Nay
Commissioner Stables Aye
Appeal # 01-01 was granted with conditions.
b. Appeal No. 01-02 (PA #200102202496) 201 Eucalyptus Dr. Mr. John Schlenke
The summary of the appeal presented by Rafael Torres-Gil, Secretary to the AAC
Presentation by John A. Schlenke, Architect, representing the Lakeside Presbyterian Church.
Comments and presentation by Robert Crawford, Pastor of the Lakeside Presbyterian Church.
Commissioner Stables inquired if the manufacturer can produce an elevator that can travel more than 13 feet and is this matter before the AAC for ratification only? The Architect indicated that yes the manufacturer could produce the appropriate elevator and R. Torres-Gil indicated that this appeal was for ratification only.
Commissioner Brown inquired if the elevator could only be released by use of a key?
Mr. Schlenke indicated that the church would have wanted that but it was not approved.
R. Torres-Gil referenced section 3903.
Commissioner Lim indicated that keys have been required in the past because of small children.
R. Torres-Gil indicated that Section 3903 only refers to exterior elevators.
Public Comment
Mr. Bruce Oka indicated that in the future larger wheelchairs may need accommodation.
Torres-Gil indicated that the drawings showed the elevator to be 34" clear and that the disabled access details generally refer to the width of the wheelchair as being 27".
Commissioner Lim asked if there are wheelchairs larger than 34". Mr. Oka indicated that there are.
Ms. Farmer stated that each floor is independently accessible and that installing the elevator is a voluntary effort.
Commissioner Brown suggested that in inclement weather portable wheelchairs could be used.
President Lim indicated that she is familiar with the site and that this is an extra accommodation. She also stated that collapsible wheelchairs could be an option.
Inspector Whipple expressed concerns that in the past older elevators had heavy doors and mechanical scissor gates and that today new elevators are now fully automated. Mr. Schlenke indicated that extra cost was expended on the doors of the elevator.
Commissioner Baltimore said that there was a prior list of conditions for Article 15 elevators and is
concerned that there be backup battery power. AAC has approved other places of worship with
similar kinds of elevators.
Commissioner Baltimore made a motion to approve the appeal for several reasons some of which are that they have alternative access to the different floors and that this is a voluntary addition to the church.
President Lim Aye
Vice-President Chatillon Aye
Commissioner Baltimore Aye
Commissioner Brown Aye
Commissioner Stables Aye
Appeal # 01-02 was granted.
6. COMMISSIONERS AND STAFF’S QUESTIONS AND COMMENTS:
Rafael Torres-Gil made note of his upcoming vacation in the month of May and that there have been no appeals filed that would be heard in May. There have been several inquiries of possible appeals.
Commissioner Baltimore inquired about circumstances when a lift is nonoperational and what options are available to members of the public. Who can they complain to? R. Torres-Gil indicated that the public can file a complaint with the Building Department.
The commissioners discussed various topics associated with emergency situations and communication alternatives in lifts and elevators.
7. PUBLIC COMMENT:
There being no public comment, the meeting was adjourned at 2:32 PM.
_________________________________________
Rafael Torres-Gil, Senior Building Inspector
Department of Building Inspection
Secretary to the Access Appeals Commission