>> >> perhaps the parties can adjourn and we will see if we can come to a conclusion. >> we need mr. duffy for the next case. >> you have to come to the microphone if you're going to speak. what she is a represented a party in the case that involves premises. i'm not sure if i am permitted to have direct communication with her on substantive matters. >> her council is not here? >> her council is not here. >> she can waive it.

>> i still cannot. >> we can continue it for one week. >> it would be two weeks at a minimum. >> we have to bite the bullet somewhere. >> do you understand the discussion now? i don't mean to suggest that you're not capable. i am not a lawyer. i assume that you are not also. this thing is to be reconciled in terms of some reasonable accommodation. it has been suggested because he is going against you in another matter that he would be barred from speaking with you directly but you can wave that. then you can have this conversation not about your lawsuit or anything else but how you solve the problems before us

and that is to get the work done that needs to be done to your unit as quickly as possible and some possible arrangement that could be made that you would find to be reasonable. >> i would be more probable if i could have a day or two. i don't think my attorney would be happy with me doing that. there has been too much mistrust. maybe -- i don't know what the answer is, a day, two days. >> you would have a minimum of two weeks. >> look, i have made it this far. >> thank you. you responded to the question. we can take it from here. >> we have not even decided

that will happen. >> i don't know what we can solve by holding this permit up any further. i am inclined to uphold the permit and all of the work to proceed. >> i feel the same way. i think that we would do more harm to other people within this building and also to the appellant were week to delay this for two weeks. she might have the bathroom. this might not be a satisfactory

arrangement of least have supported party and the use of j c c four showering purposes. the bathroom is completed. maybe you would be able to do that without this board having to close. >> i concur. i think a two week extension only does more harm than good here. >> i doubt if this board can force you to do that. would you step up -- are you willing to extend that? >> absolutely without reservation. >> i think that would do more for the palette than harm. >> thank you, sir.

>> i think some of these questions are more rent questions and the board of appeal questions. >> is very motion? >> i will move to uphold. >> the motion is to uphold, permit number 2011-5-12th on the basis that the project complies with the code. >> yes. >> before we do that, madam director, do we need to take an action on five-to be before we vote on this? >> we can do it separately. ok, so we have a motion. please call the roll.

>> the motion is to uphold the permit on the basis that this complies with the code. on the motion, -- >> aye. >> aye. >> aye. >> aye. >> aye. >> the vote is 5-0. the permit as of health. >> we have item 5b to grapple with. >> we have a filly to prosecute, we can dismiss. the appellant did not show. we heard from mr. duffy that the department is to do something with the permit and can provoke it. i am satisfied with that. >> if you choose to overturn the

department, the pilot would have -- >> my concern about this is that this would be the one-year statute that they cannot be applied. it seems cleaner since we have heard from mr. duffy then they need to do something with the apartment. i don't know if that is agreeable to the other commissioners? >> i will make a motion. >> might give the permit holder an opportunity to speak. >> certainly.

>> my comment is that it is not our intention to do any more work than is permitted. there is a separate permit under this application for the heaters in unit 358. there is at least one other permit that has been pulled under this application. we have been working within the rules, even though the application itself might be broad. i'm committed to make sure the paperwork is right. it is our belief that the work itself has been done under the permit has been permitted. >> i think that mr. epstein is

referring to maybe plumbing permits. those are fine. i don't have any issues. of a flight to work to figure out each notice of violation to see if it would be ok to go ahead. during my research, i saw that it could not do it on this permit. it will probably mean another permit to to leak from the scope of this permit. there is no it the way to do this without revoking. i don't want to revoke it, i would rather clean it up a little bit like getting a permit that takes some of these items of, which i think would be acceptable to mr. epstein. >> there is another option, mr. dufty, that we continue this case if we can modify the permit.

perhaps we should continue this and have you provide the direction that the department requires. of i am sure that there are elements of the work which needs to be finished for other tenants and perhaps then clean up the paperwork through the modification of this board. >> the board would issue the permit. >> we would condition the existing permit. >> it sounds like the board which a strike all ordinance except for the bathroom in model. is that acceptable? >> a rather it was comprehensive. perhaps there are items there veto about that needs to be done, otherwise there are other tenants? >> you would run into a lot of work if the violation is there.

some of it would be ok if what i know this is quite a lot of violations that would not be covered under this from the foot that is not a solution. >> that way we can clean this up. >> that does not affect this plumbing permits. i think we would like to go ahead with the bathroom remodels, which is final, and then the logical permits which are fine, and then take all of the notices of violation of this permit. >> when you are going through line by line, can you add something about the lead paint abatement? >> i would like to contact our

housing inspections. we want to make sure that the contractor does comply. >> is very motion? >> i want to be perfectly clear. >> there are probably appropriate portions that we don't want to delay for a different tenant. if we continue this, would that delayed the ability to do that work? >> yes, we can finish the remodel on the bathroom. >> what problems do we present to you if we uphold the permit?

>> i could take other action later. the permit has not had a final inspection. there is the effort to remove some of them and to revise his permit and to delete the scope of work and some of the violations. >> or, we could modify this permit right now by deleting all references to the mou. >> i could explain what the proper permits are. he has the proper permits. there is even a notice of violation on here that has been available. this is a badly written permit. >> ok. >> is that mr. sanchez's faults. >> not tonight. >> is there any public comment? ok.

>> i will move to uphold the permit -- excuse me, grant the appeal. >> mr. duffy has made reference to the stairs and that is a separate permit. actually on the application, it refers to the violation to look at that particular application. what i would ask the board to do would be to deny the appeal and to give mr. duffy and i the opportunity to sit down. i can give you my pledge of good faith. i don't think that they have had any problems dealing with me.

this will allow us to move forward without concerns over what exactly it is that the board has told us that we cannot do. >> he is constrained about figuring out what has been done rather than trying to figure it out. that is my concern. thank you. >> is any rebuttal from you? >> i think we're done. >> this was simply require a continuance. >> we to hold to other tenants in the building because there is work that could be done.

unless we can go over it, i would be voting blindly. this seems like mr. duffy is uphold in the arrangement. >> i would personally be more comfortable with that. >> i am comfortable with the concept. >> the council for the permit holders suggested that we deny the permit. >> i would say to uphold and go

forward. >> , the comment that was made is that he felt very comfortable that is dealing with the permit, things that might not be in the permit. nothing will be strapped on the rug by doing that. -- swept under the rug by doing that.

christ can we hear from the permit holder what particular work would present a safety issue if this has been allowed to continue for two weeks? >> the issues that i'm concerned with are that there are some steps in the back stairs that need to be repaired prior to the actual demolition and replacement stairs because they create an immediate health and safety issue. there are plumbing issues that are being dealt with which create the same issues. there are also heat issues. there are two units. as a matter of fact, the person who is appealing is simply wanting to put in heaters for the unit. the heat in her unit would be

affected, particularly in 356, which was done by the first contractor. that is the list as it comes to me right now. >> if the board believes is permit was issued in error, there are aspects that don't comply with the code, i would recommend not approving it. once the board approves it, that approves a permit. this is lawful and allowed under the permit, it might be preferable.

>> if i had five minutes, i think that he could get through each violation and agreed to remove them from the permit. there are some that we can keep on their probably. >> i was about to suggest that we take a break after this case. why don't we do that and give you a chance to have a conversation. >> i thought that we should not go ahead with this permit with the references to the violations. >> i was calling to suggest a break. might we break for 10 minutes and returned to this case.