getting them through the city, bidding on them, and then building. i think everyone here is much more experienced on a regular basis of how things do and do not go down when you have bits. it is true, we will be at the far end of the weather, but we hope we can get it all done. if we cannot, we will come back to you on hands and knees, it will be the weather. thank you. >> i think you basically voiced our sentiments, too. at this point, we think we can do this in six months. i would prefer to come back in six months. we are working together, as you can see. it is not like it is going to go back into the courts at this

point. just to refine and get this done. the intent is to get this done. it is in both parties interest to get this wall don. >> great. could we hear from staff? -- wall done. >> would it be appropriate if you grant the six-month continuance, to report to you in writing at the next scheduled meeting so that you would at least know the arbitration decision was made by the judge? i would concur with the six months because, as you mentioned earlier, it has been tabled in number of times. we received one continuance, and maybe we will get two more continuances. i hope this is the last time.

>> with regard to the life safety, any concerns there? >> the two affected parties are before you and they are in agreement, taking on any concerns there. that gives us some comfort level. >> we are willing to give you a progress report on what is going on at the arbitration level, in terms of plans and executions, if that would convince you to give us that time.

we are shooting for six months, and we are hoping to achieve that. so we are asking for one last continue as of this matter. >> i would like to give a continuance. i think everybody pretty much agrees, but commissioner walker expressed something below bit different. i did not hear you make a motion. did you want to? >> i would tend not to do a continuance, coupled the order, hold it in abeyance -- to uphold the order, hold it in advance and then maybe have a check-in. let me ask the city attorney, if we uphold the order with the six months old, can we add to that, if we need, within that six months' time? if there is an emergency delay or something? >> i am not sure. i would have to check. you would then modify the order of abatement to allow the six months to complete the work, is that when you are saying?

>> yes. >> if it came to you within six months, the question would be then, could you re-modify it? i think you can but i'm not positive. i would want to take some time to get that answer. >> given the fact that the goal is to do this wall, i would say a six month continuance for us to come back -- neither the wong's or my intentions client is to have the wall not being done. it is in the intention of both parties. you have to understand we are doing this as fast as possible. our hands are tied because of the process, arbitration, because of what is going on there. i would plead that we did the six months continuance. we would give you a progress reports in the meanwhile so you know where we are going with this, and then come back.

>> i might give maybe a two months continuance. maybe then we would have more information in order to actually make a final decision. right now, it feels like there is not a final agreement with the arbitrator's, but i would like to see something more concrete sooner than six months. >> if that is your inclination, realistically speaking, it will take us about a month and a half to get back in front of the arbitrator. i would foresee that it would take another month for as to come up with new plans. >> so three months? >> that would be much more for us to figure out, in terms of time lines. >> commissioner walker, what is going on here, i believe this is a genuine effort to resolve this year whether they come back in three months or six months --

to me, by giving you the six months, that is it. we resolution on that. that is my position, but i will lean towards the rest of the commission. i am quite okay with the six months, provided that at six months is used to resolve what we discussed here this morning in all aspects. obviously, we are concerned that this gets done before the rainy season. it would be nice to see this done by the end of the year. >> certainly. the goal was to have it done two years ago. certainly, that would be our primary goal, to get this done as soon as possible, before the end of the year. commissioner lee pointed out an issue, it is not in our powers. there are other parameters in play here. we do not want to have to say,

if it takes six months and one week -- we do not want to have further proceedings here. i do not mind giving progress reports and coming in and giving you more of an idea as to what is happening at our local, but i do not want anything drastic to happen at this point when we are right in the middle of trying to finalize the judgment. >> how about we continue this for a maximum of up to six months, but we hear it earlier, as soon as a resolution is achieved with the arbitrator. >> that is fine. >> then our department should get an update on how to arbitration is going so that we can schedule it earlier. can we do that? >> we have already continued it three times.

i want to say that i think there is a life safety issue. you may well take it on, which it sounds like you have, but nonetheless, i think we need to really put down, like, that we need this resolved. i would favor a shorter continuance so we get these people before us with the final proposal. that is why i was suggesting three months. if you wanted done by six months, that is the way it will have to play, in my opinion. i will not support six months, but i would a three-month continuance. >> can we make a motion to extend for a maximum up to six months but to hear it item earlier what the arbitrator rules? >> you would continue for three months, and then when they

appear in three months -- ok, i'm sorry. i have lost track of where we are them. >> continue for a maximum of six months. if the arbitrator finishes his -- makes a ruling, we hear it as soon as that ruling is completed. >> under the building code, you can grant continuances. those are not to exceed 60 days. you have had the practice -- for example, the last one was for 90 days. i am just pointing out what the building code says. one possibility that i see is that you give a continuance for 60 days, they appear in 60 days, state their progress, and at that point, you could a

couple of the order of abatement, held in abeyance, until december. i think that would satisfy the various problems. >> i would like to make that motion. continue for 60 days, you come back to report, and then we make the decision. >> shall we vote on it? >> public comment? is there any public comment on this item? is there any further discussion from commissioners? ok. roll call vote on the motion to continue the case for 60 days. [roll call]

the motion carries unanimously. item e, new appeals, case #6760, 1654 haight street, owner of record and appellant ronald rowe mine. agent for the appellant, leo mcfadden. action requested by the appellant, appellant has requested additional time to complete the work. >> good morning. you have a continuance request before you. we will concur with every decide. -- whatever you decide. >> and there are no life safety issues? >> no, not that we are aware of.

>> ok, move to continue. >> public comment? >> would anyone like to speak to this item? >> there is no public comment on this item. roll call vote. >> can i just clarify the amount of time for the continuance? 30 days? ok. i just did not hear. sorry. >> the motion is to continue the item, 1654 haight street, for 60 days. [roll call] the motion carries unanimously. item number two, case #6761, 1299 arguello blvd.

owner of record and appellant sam hom. architect for the appellant, van t. ly and associates. action required by appellant, the appellant is requesting more time to have architect of the required permits. >> good morning, members of the board. chief housing inspector. 1299 arguello blvd. is a five- unit building with a plea or guest rooms on three floors of occupancy. at issue is a notice of violation that was issued in january 2011 regarding a set of stairs that is a second means of egress for one of the units. as you can see from the staff report, we have worked with this particular property owner and we did not schedule it for the directors hearing until the following march, march 2012.

at that point in time, the structure was significantly deteriorated and have a significant done over to it with new materials without any bread -- building permit. indeed, a building permit was not filed until july 3 of this year. 18 months after the notice of violation was issued we have a building permit filed not yet issued, going through the process. we're happy to see that, but the property owner is here appealing the order of abatement issuance from the hearing officer, wanting more time. from staff's standpoint, we did not have a choice but to send this to the directors hearing and it asked for an order. i do not think there was much option on the part of the hearing officer because at march -- in march, we did not have a building permit. you can see from the photographs

in your staff report, they are unsafe. there are no guardrails, somebody can fall through. you can see there are some new pressure-treated materials on the stairway. the question is how long? we are sympathetic with the economy and what property owners have to face. the question for us is how long and what message does this decision sent to other cases i have with similar situations? this is unique in that they are only dealing with a second means of egress to only one unit, but while we are sympathetic, i have to ask you to uphold the hearing officer, but perhaps the property owner, mr. hom, maybe he has other information to share with you. unless you have any other question -- >> the permit has not been issued yet? >> yes, it was just filed july 3, to comply with a notice of

violation. >> thank you, rosemary. can we hear from mr. hom's representative? >> my name is van ly and i have been obtained by the property owner. i filed an application on july 3, application number 201217034364. this kind of application usually is counter approval because it is a violation. it is a very simple set of stairs. after the filing procedure, the department gave their signature, and then we went to the third

department, city planning. city planning is hesitating approving because they were questioning whether the original stairs were built with a permit. the location of the stairs in a question is in the required briard. they asked me to provide proof that the stairs were made with a permit. the process stopped there. i was requested to provide proof. when i came back to talk to my client, he said he remembered that the stairs were built with permits. that fact was on the report. so we came back to order the report on july 10. according to my client's

recollection, 15 days until this. i have not received anything. they have up until the end of the month, the last day of the 15 working days. i assume if i have the report, proof that the stairs were originally built with a permit, i should be able to get the compliance permit within the same day because it is usually over the counter. i do not know what kind of procedure you want to take but i do need at least until mid- august in order to secure the building permit. >> question? >> how long to do the work? >> if we get the contractor, it should not take more than one month.

no situation would take longer than that. >> also for your information, according to what i understood, this is for one dwelling unit only. it is an apartment but this is the only access for one building. >> i am just saying we could uphold the order and give three months to execute. >> it is not done, i will give you reasonable reason. >> i would like to hear what rose mary thinks about this. >> staff has no problem with that if we find this is a unique circumstance because of the history and lease rate.

obviously, we would have liked to have this done in the last 18 months but they are making steps in the right direction. i do need to let the board know that we are right now processing cost under the ordinance, about $2,600. we would want that to be upheld and not shortened, because we have had to go back and forth on this property to try to get them to comply. we have no problem with you doing that in this unique circumstance. >> agreed. >> i would like to make a motion to uphold the order and hold it for three months to allow for the permitting and construction. >> i would consider this a life safety matter. the stairs are an exit and they were not built properly, and from what i'm looking at, they will have to tear out what they have built and rebuilt. it is about a two-day job be done so what is your suggestion?

>> 30 days to get a permit, to complete all work within 60 to 90 days. >> can i make a request on the department? i understand she still needs a 3r report? could we expedite that and give her the report? this week? >> yes, commissioner. i will look into it. the permit, if it is rebuild or repair, that will have to change. they are going to have to tear it down, so this will be a new set of stairs. >> i believe we can uphold the order of abatement and give 90 days in order to get a permit and execute it and get final approval >> that should take

care of the matter, as long as they get the permit within 30 days. >> permit within 30 days and then execute by 90 days, with final inspection, and etcetera >> public comment? >> is there any public comment on the motion? would either side like to rebuttal? there is a motion on the floor, second. roll call vote.

[roll call] the motion carries unanimously. item f, general public comment. this item is for general public comment for any items not listed on the abatement appeals board agenda. seeing none, item g, adjournment. is there a motion to adjourn? second? public comment? we are all in favor to adjourn. in the opposed? we are now adjourned at 9:52 a.m.