you would imagine this is the current state. on top of that, over two layers of building paper, you can see the exterior elevations for the plastering system where there is plastered. this detail shows the same thing with those for two buildings. it does not say how it will finish. >> those could be unfinished? >> well, it could be. i don't think that there is any code requirement. >> i think that this is a nicer finished because of the horizontal verses plywood.

>> does it seem reasonable for someone to speak with one party involved in the issue to determined to deny without having spokesperson not having spoken to the person? >> we deal primarily with the permit holder. the work is to be done by that person. we don't ordinarily go around and talk to the neighbor's claim fuhr -- to the neighbors sa.

what is before us is not the question whether the citing should go up, what is before us is the issue that access was not

formally denied. the question is whether access would be allowed or whether there would be in a pattern of delay or old problems. i think that's the problems are reflected in both parties. i did not see from the permit holders brief any documentation that had an urgent need to provide access. delong e-mails that went back- and-forth, i don't think that there was an intended solution.

people need to look at their finances and get final approval. the issue there is to paris culpability. we should require that the siding to be put up. this is a framework for whether there is some level of cost. >> there used to be a commissioner on this board who occasionally would repeat the words of rodney king, why can't we get along? he has since moved on to planning. the children should have been barred from this hearing because they are having to watch

adults acting badly. this is a surge. the fact that these parties cannot solve this problem. -- this is absurd. i don't know how to view the fact that there was an offer to put up $1,500. is this an indication of working this out? the way i feel about this right now is that we could overturn but i don't think that this will get us very close to the solution. i think we would get closer to a solution if it were to retain jurisdiction and instruct these parties and get feast people to

act like adults. they should come back to us at some point with a statement that this has been worked out and i will grant access to the permit holder and this will go forward and whatever compensation is made by one side of the other is not really our business or affair. >> i agree with what has been said. >> there is a notion of the property owner is doing work to her home and it looks like the

original notice did include citing --siding. if you would prefer painted, that really needs to fall on the property owner. i am trying to think of a solution but i don't see the party is working this out on their own. i was more inclined to require the appellant to come up with $59 and the rest to be borne by the permit holder. >> i don't think that we can do that. i think it is reasonable to let her know that she is covered. if there is any liability, we

will have this in writing and we will know this going forward. we are going to be on your property and we would like to be there for this amount of time. it is very reasonable. i don't know how we can figure this out, to ask them to come up with these kinds of issues. >> i think we need to provide more of a starting point. if the offer was made, i would like to have that considered. if i was going to be on this side, this amount of siding, i could probably get this done in a week. the permit holders will get a time frame that is probably two weeks or less.

each party knows exactly what is going on. >> you left out the issue having to do with insurance. >> that is no problem. >> i would make a motion. we would continue this matter, we would ask the party would a reasonable date to come back. the things that this board has asked for having to do with insurance or time lines, i guess this is still some issue. this will address the issue of access to the backyard. then for the appellants to indicate whether the $1,500 is

still on the table. hopefully all of these things will be worked out and sometime soon they will come back and the neighbors will not suffer from a series visual blight. can you let us know how much time this would require? >> my suggestion would be to continue the hearing until november 3rd. then everyone can reach an agreement and to perform under that agreement. by that time, we can have the citing up-- siding up.

we want to make sure that there are no additional costs or expenses. >> if the parties come to an agreement, the appeal could be withdrawn as well as the permit. >> i don't think any other word can go forward. >> well, no work can go forward on this particular permit. >> or this could be withdrawn. >> i say we postpone this until

next week to get the conversation going and over with. >> it stands, i would still pay for the cedar siding. >> that is for you all to work out. knowing that you cannot do the work, is next week too soon? >> the note -- the next opportunity is october 13th.

>> i cannot come that week because i have work commitments. i want the board to just deny the permit. >> we cannot do this. >> the 13th does not work for me. >> the 25th? >> the 24th. >> you will come back and say you have an agreement? >> that would work. >> i would like to entertain october 6th. >> that would be alright. >> madden director, we would put

to this earlier. >> are we hearing arguments or are we just having a report on the status of the negotiations? >> i appreciate the question. i think that if they come back and did not reach an agreement, we should throw this to the board. do we get to vote on the issue at that time? >> this is in obtaining additional briefing or comments or arguments from the party? >> i think that is correct. this is a yes or no answer. >> no additional briefing, no additional arguments. your motion is to move this to

october. >> they should be allowed to submit whatever forms of agreement whether they are in agreement or not. >> if one side is totally unreasonable, i don't know that there would be an agreement in place. >> part of this is limited. >> we can limit them to three minutes. >> the slaves problems because of the adjustment that oral presentation hopefully they will just come and say that we have reached an agreement. >> i would rather see -- if the two sides realize that they cannot come to an agreement, we will. >> here is the agreement, i did

not mean we've reached an agreement, see you later, we're going to have a drink together. >> do you want to see the proposals? they don't reach agreement whether there is counterproposals. >> those would do the thursday prior. i would entertain a short page limit. >> they can get it done in three pages. >> >> we have a motion from commissioner garcia to continue this until october 6th for the parties to discuss settlement and if this is not reached, they my estimate of 23 pages of

their proposal on the thursday prior to hearing. they are also able to submit their agreed upon settlement. on that motion -- >> aye. >> aye. >> aye. >> aye. >> calling item number7, 10-078. this is protesting the issuance of a permit to alter a building, voluntary structured upgrade on ground floor, at concrete sheer wall at ground-floor and replace foundation only. we will start with the appellant

as soon as the room is cleared.

>> good evening. i will speak very briefly and then allowed the tenants who are here to actually talk about why we are here. in a nutshell, we don't oppose the seismic upgrades of the building and are seeking conditions to protect the tennis from eviction either through making the work conditions so intolerable that they move voluntarily or that they are served some kind of notice of determination and they're camped out indefinitely. their responses are both in consistent with each other. one says that no one will be effected, not even temporarily.

then there is a declaration that there is no way that this will be kept. we are here to ask for your assistance and protection. >> i live in the building for 12 years. i love this apartment. this has been strange ever since we have started this process about doing improvements to the apartment, it is changed. we would want anything done in terms of safety but it started off with planning to remodel our kitchens and bathrooms.

we don't really know what is happening. there has not been anything on the land lured side to fill the units and it really questions at what the intention is of this work since it has been so sporadic. the landlord, whenever we have visitors to the building, he has been very difficult with dealing with them. he often approaches them outside a department and questions them and sometimes asking them questions to the point of harassment.

there is a lot of questions about what the point is of this process. >> i live in apartment 11. i am very happy in my apartment. i have really two issues. one is the issue of supporting any seismic work that is done to make the building safe. the second problem or i should say in addition, a want to make sure that the permit that is afforded by the board is a

permanent condition on no one losing their apartment. that is really important. that building will be habitable during the work. they will use professionals who are qualified. that is important for us to know. i would like to make sure that mr. mccarthy has the financial worth all two finished his work because what we would like to see the work continuing a set of being stopped due to financial considerations. do those things, we can service support what mr. mccarthy is trying to do. the other issue is the whole question of our relations with mr. mccarthy asbestos since this process started five years ago. of like to take exception to a

statement that was made in response to the brief. i think that this is 0.19, lines 2-3. most of the tenants have voluntarily moved out and have been sympathetic to my situation. i know all of my neighbors well and that is absolutely not true. most of the people have moved out because the climate has been very hostile and unsympathetic. this question of lamb or tenant relations is really important. we will be in the middle of this

construction site and this is really important. one elderly lady who was getting harassed actually sought legal help and the attorney had to write a letter on her behalf to make sure that her visitors and friends and family were not harassed. i noticed in her correspondent that the harassment continued even after this letter. >> i agree that there is a

seismic upgrade. there is concern that mr. mccarthy is using permits out of this. the very intense experiences have been hostile and not release supporters of a healthy living environment. he has gone through our garbage. he has taken our garbage. this is not just about a permit, this is the someone who systematically trying to prevent

people. >> we will hear from the permit holder now. you also have seven minutes. thank you. >> i am the cartilage engineer for the project. what is in front of you is a structural permit. i am delighted that some tenants are supportive of the seismic effort. there have been efforts through the years and this is exactly

the type of building that we need to be upgraded. the structural drawings are in your template and they described the effort and what has been done to this space. all work would be done below the floor. this is all part of new perimeter footings. the actual condition of the building is deplorable. this exceeds 11 and a half inches. this is substantially weakened. i was retained about 18 months ago to work with the building and property owner. in regards to the relationship between the project sponsor and the tenant, the attendant has

ever been evicted. i just heard from ms. fox that she some read the click 15 -- that she read the conflicting report. if they have no issues with the permit, why appeal it? they call me, we can meet. can we get the project sponsor to meet? it does not make any sense that he will appeal a permit that you are fully supportive of. why appeal? they made some statements in regards to mr mccarthy we would like an opportunity to introduce ourselves.