i think as you hear everyone speak it will be revealed that delaying is the basis of of what they would like. we are doing a basement renovation, completely in the interior of our home, he's upset about our garbage, which is a d.p.w. matter. so i don't know -- delaying is his way of strong arming us. i'd like you to recognize that. thank you. >> thank you. >> good afternoon,

commissioners. harlan coffman. the reason for continuance is because this project was drawn with a number of omissions in the project plans. the permit application there's certain things that may be incorrect about it and it's been referred to the department of building inspect so they can look into these issues and do a thorough investigation of them. there is six issues that i had outlined that the chief inspector had asked me to provide, one of them was that there's a third level second means of egress eliminated, it was built under plan and permit in 1963, i have it in my notes, i can show that to you, that was eliminated at some stable, i don't think the project sponsor did that, but it was done and it wasn't shown in the

plans. there was windows that could very possibly -- that very possibly were not done with permit as well. there's also an electrical breaker panel that -- >> excuse me, commissioners. the matter before you -- >> the matter for continuance is d.b.i. is looking into this right nowful they can review this and determine if the project is actually responding to the initial notice of violation and what ramifications there are in the plans that maybe have to be changed that have planning issues. they're part and parcel. it's hard to separate one type of thing from the other. >> thank you. is there additional public comment on the continuance mat her >> i'm angela logan, i theme

project sponsor, i would like to put one thing forward as far as the plans going through d.b.i. this prompt has been completely through the building department on its wave of getting a building permit. it was approved. it was subsequently suspended because harlan has a notification that was not properly notified. so the permit was suspended -- >> so you don't support the continuance? >> i do not support the continuance. this has been reviewed by building department. i would also like to add that the permit was initially sought to address a notice of violation that was issued in response to a complaint filed by half lan hoffman. he filed a complaint, a violation was issued, plans were drawn up to correct the

complaint, they were taken to the building department and approved. only subsequently was that suspended in order for this to be brought -- for him to be notified. >> is there any other public comment on the item as it relates to the continuance. >> mr. hoffman, you may not speak again. thank you. >> i'm former president of liberty hill neighborhood association and we -- this is the first time i have seen the project sponsor. i wish that they had come before us. just wanted to mention that there hasn't been a lot of -- although this seems like a trivial problem, in the neighborhood it's very serious. i just waited a long time to testify to this. we are very beset by scavengers in the neighborhood and i was going to describe that. >> are you in favor or not of

the continuance? >> i'm kind of neutral on that. that's what -- we're talking about the continuance. >> yes it is the continuance, you'll have to decide i'm wrust mentioning. >> thank you. is there any additional comment on the continuance matter? seeing none, public comment is closed. commissioners. commissioner antonini? commissioner antonini: maybe i could ask staff -- in regards to this issue that's being raised, i'm a little unfamiliar with the, you know, there's the question of whether or not d.b.i. has reviewed this adequately or not. is it properly before us? and i guess i wanted to know a little bit about the issue of

the noteation that the requester is bringing up. >> thank you, commissioner. kimberly duronde, planning department staff. what has occurred is the permit to alter the ground room floors was approved by the planning department over the counter and subsequently issued by d.b.i. as a code complying permit and project. the staff neglected to notify the b.b.n. holder, who then contacted the zoning administrator, requesting that the issued building permit application be suspended, which he did, and which was. subsequent to that, i issued a b.b.n. letter to mr. hoffman per the requirement and waited the 10-day period, during which he filed for this discretionary review on an issued code

complying permit. >> so in your opinion the d.b.i. has reviewed all of -- there are a number of items brought up as being things that the continuance would allow d.b.i. to review. but you feel these have been reviewed? >> d.b.i. has already approved the permit that is under this particular hearing's discretion. as far as the issue -- as far as the issues that were raised, i read some of the concerns on his request for continuance and they all seem to fall under strictly d.b.i.'s complaint line and for them to go out and investigate and isn't really under the sort of scope of what we're here to do today. >> one would expect that even if we didn't take d.r. and

approve the project that they could still -- >> of course. >> of course check these things. >> yes. >> is there a motion to continue or not? we'll hear the item today. >> good evening commissioners, kimberly duronde, planning department staff. you have before you a request for discretionary review for a building permit for an interior remodel of ground room floors in an r.h. 3 zoning and liberty hill historic district. the subject building permit proposes an interior renovation consistent with the planning department's rooms down matrix per the zoning ad mrtor bulletin and will be connected to the main dwelling area above the unopen stairway. the garbage can screening, which appears on the primary concern of the d.r. requestor

is a temporary structure not aficted to the building or the ground, hence this structure does not require building permit and is considered via zoning administrator to be a permitted on instruction per planning code section 136. excuse me. the residential design team met and reviewed this project and finds the interior ground floor alterations are consistent with our policies and does not have any design related concerns with the temporary garbage can screening. furthermore, since the building permit is not required a certificate of appropriateness is not needed, nor is review by the historic preservation commission. the department has received no correspondence or phone calls opposing the project in supporting the d.r., on the contrary, the project as proposed has received a total of 12 letters and one phone

call in support of the property owners and the permit. and against the d.r. the project doesn't contain any exceptional or extraordinary circumstances -- i did receive a few extra after the commission packets were done and they are there. there's no exceptional or extraordinary circumstances, under the planning commission's pending d.r. reform legislation, this project would not be referred to the commission. as such, this d.r. warranted an preasted staff analysis which i did but i would like to note, that said, the staff time i've spent on this issue, just my own staff time and with processing the d.r. and the enforcement portion of this case, has resulted in over 50 hours of staff time. staff recommends that you do not take discretionary review

and approve the project as proposed. thank you very much. >> thank you. d.r. "or. -- requestor. >> thank you again. harlan hoffman. i was going to present another letter in favor of the d.r. that i had shown you from mr. santos. there's also several items that support the issue of the d.r., maybe not directly the d.r., but there's a letter from mr. santos, also a letter that went, part of the package that went to the historic preservation commission from mr. jerry goldberg, there's a letter also to mr. scott sanchez regarding a letter to uphold an initial notice of violation sent by the planning department signed by about 15 people and several of them made

chents on it. i didn't go out and try to solicit a lot of letters. i thought what i had was fairly adequate and there was a lot of support many this direction as well. there's also comments by buck passmore taken into account by the neighborhood association of liberty hill and they passed a resolution saying that if at all possible, when someone is doing a project, of a certain magnitude on the ground floor or first floor of a building, that it's not a matter of convenience but it's also of what's good for the neighborhood and what's good for the neighborhood is not to have the trash enclosures out on the street because there's a lot of issues that have come up about them. i don't know that i can speak any more to the continuance issue but the d.b.i. is investigating these issues and they do have -- they do have authority to look into them and a lot of them do have planning code issues. for instance, i drew this plan from the 1963 plan done by

permit and a second means of egress was removed from the third floor of the building and a deck was extended. those had planning code consequences and they have consequence in terms of the path traveled. i also outlined if you were to be under the building at that stage where it overhangs, i wouldn't want to be the fireman trying to rescue someone under that structure because it's very unstable, that also has planning code issues. i think there's a lot of reasons for the continuance to let d.b.i. do their study. also, planning has made the argument that this is a temporary structure when in fact the department of public works requires this structure to be fixed in place. not temporary. it's supposed to be a permanent structure and that's the purpose of the structure as

well. i think it's kind of a -- it would be like driving an automobile without headlights at night and it doesn't meet the california motor code, and you're speeding and saying, it doesn't meet the motor code and i'm speeding and because it doesn't meet the motor code, that means the speeding is just forgotten about and the police officer just says, ok, no problem. i'm not trying to be punitive, i'm saying there are other alternatives to putting this trash enclosure right in the front yard setback and right adjacent to my property. it's p become a draining issue for me, i've had to deal with litter issue others the last 10 years. i didn't bring this to d.b.i. until the tenants were asked to move and there was no one else there to clean up as much as i was. and it all fell on me and for about a year i just documented the issues with the trash problem and the way it looked

and how it impacted my own property and certain other items regarding people breaking into them and when myself or any of my tenants are going to go out their door and someone is breaking into the trash enclosures, i don't want to go out there, i want to stay in because it's right next to me and also, i talked about the neighborhood guidelines and the neighborhood guidelines talk about integrating the block and respecting the block and i think that if at all possible, people should bring their trash cans in and set them out on the morning of the collection or the night before and then bring them back in, otherwise it's a free for all and anyone can do it. i don't think there's anyone in this room that would want to live next door and have to clean up someone else's garbage. it's been an important issue to me and i've never been able to work it out with the project sponsor. i think there's a lot of reasons for continuance, i think there's also a lot of

reasons for, perhaps, because the plans were not drawn with a lot of, with information that was left off like the electrical box wasn't shown, that's a new breaker panel, we also have what happened in san bruno and pg&e. >> are there speakers in support of the d.r. requestor? i believe i have one speaker card. mr. barbee. john barbee. >> good afternoon, i'm john barbee. we have no problem with the interior renovation. the problem is with the trash containers and the design of these bin enclosures. we're very beset by scavengers in the neighborhood, they're very bold and resourceful. when i set my trash out, i get six competing parties who come by that night and raid the bins.

some are responsible and kind of pathetic, others are visibly crazy or obviously substance abusers, they drink out of bottles that still have something in them, so that's unmistakable. the temporary enclosure these people have is still open at the top. the scavepjers can come in and raid. it's terrible for us because when they do this, they empty the general rubbish bin all other the sidewalk, things fly all other the place they don't clean them up, we are responsible for doing that. and it's an ongoing problem to have bins exposed seven days a week. that's awkward. you know. it creates problems for the general neighborhood. also because we are an historic district, counterintuitively, we cannot make a bin enclosure that's victorian in design and post-modern and even simple, automatically create an eyesore when they're put in front of

elaborate victorians. we have a little bit of a design concern right there. we do this dance of a the corp.ons every time we add anything new to our houses. it has to appear post-modern or generic with all the contradiction that implies so it becomes very serious. it's a serious -- it's serious from a general nuisance standpoint. i think you need to revisit the actual design of the bin enclosures. we were expressing concern, very few neighbors actually have their bins in the front and those that do have them completely sealed with a little cabinet that has a roof on the top. that sounds like a better way of doing it. i know this is temporary but you must also know the problem of temporary structures that simply go on forever. isn't there a limit to how long a temporary structure may be there? and so that's why it addresses some other general concerns. i'm sorry if it doesn't seem very important but we were shocked when we saw how relaxed

the d.p.w. standards were. they were able to put a frail little chicken wire screen in front of these bins and d.p.w. immediately dropped their oklahomas. the screen was torn apart in two weeks by the same familiar scavengers. it can't be that relaxed. you know. the trash bins are big, noticeable thing and it's got to be dealt with in a responsible way by the city of san francisco. thank you very much. >> thank you. are there additional speakers in support of the d.r. requestor? >> yes. thank you. my name is jerry goldberg, i'm a retired a tech and urban designer, i live on 21st street, the street we're talking about. as has been noted, the liberty hill neighborhood association passed the recommendation that mr. passmore drafted for us. i think that's a very positive