the name? >> i did not realize that was a problem until the inspector came. >> the gate is not the issue. it might be ok and has been installed. there is no landing in front. >> which is a violation. >> is there a way for this game to be relocated to where there is a landing? >> i could put it in the middle, but someone would have to come and cut it. >> can we talk to the inspector about that? >> in your opinion, could a gate be installed legally of location?

>> i believe that it can. i will show you another picture of. -- picture. but would not be the one to sign off on this, but i believe that it can be right in this area and. >> rate in this area. >> this easy solution -- >> right in this area of. >> that is an easy solution. taking care of the other violations? >> correct. >> we need to make sure that the gate swings out. >> again, we have been in touch with the cover the owner and have given a continuance the

first time with an additional 28 days. >> this is the proper dealer right here. >> correct. -- this is the property owner right here. >> correct. >> any public comment? seeing no one, rebuttal from the department? many more inspectors? >> did you have any final words? >> thank you. >> are you willing to relocate the gate? >> put in the center? that is what i will have to do. >> in that case i would move to uphold the staff recommendation and give 30 days to complete the work. if it is not, it has to be signed off and all of the

appropriate fees paid. >> she does still need to apply for the permit. complying with building code requirements. >> 30 days. >> that was heard twice, it has been over one year and we have been dealing with this for 14 months. let's maybe 60 days. >> she has been showing -- >> maybe 60 days. >> she has been showing plenty of activity. she is not a licensed architect or contractor. >> i am off for work, that will give me time. >> amended to 60 days.

>> moved by the commissioner. seconded by commissioner walker. [roll call vote] >> the motion carried unanimously. >> moving on to the next item, continued appeal an order of abatement, 6733. five see more street. margaret nelson and winston montgomery. >> can i ask francesca what we should do on a continued base?

>> it is your discretion as to what another time you want to give the party. traditionally, they each get three minutes. then public comment. you have not yet taken action. >> good morning. my name is donald duffy. violation is the dormitory constructed for permit from december 14 through 2009. 2008, 0612346, stopping the legality of the existing dorm found in 2008 without issuance today.

>> questions? >> what happened between the first hearing and this one? >> the building permit applications with at the planning department was approved on the 25th of october this year. what if there are no other questions? >> how long will it be in that department? >> [unintelligible] >> border from the palate? >> good morning, commissioners. as i said before, i think i have

made reasonable attempts to make this ferment finalized m. lee bloodiest -- finalized and legalized. requiring orders of abatement are unrealistic in slow-moving procedures to get a building permits through planning. recently i went through a d r request a hearing -- the art request a hearing -- dr request during -- hearing for a building permit. sorry.

but since i m going of a reasonable speed and i do not think i should be fined or have an assessment of cost. the procedure itself is slow. there is a policy statement that says that the process should be fair and understandable. i think it is a matter of fairness that i would have tried to legalize. if i have followed all the steps. that is all but 1/2 to say. thank you. >> any questions? >> did you start to work before the work was executed?

>> this was billed 25 years ago. as a result, disputing with my neighbors, i was turned in to the building department. yes, it was built before. the permit in applying for is for legalization. >> i make a motion to extend additional troops at this time. >> any public comment? seeing no one, ok. >> go ahead with the motion? >> and make a motion fox's to extend -- >> i make a motion to extend of the permit. -- motion to extend the permit.

>> stayed and coming back if there is an issue? >> you want that? >> you want to give 90 days? >> ok, 90 days. >> second. the upholding of the staff and staying of the action for 90 days, pending the permit work to be done. >> i think that what you're saying is to pick a final action today and if all of the work is completed, the order of abatement would not issue. the alternative would be to do continuance for 90 days to come back and report what is happening. i just wanted to clarify. >> 90 days sounds like a permit

issued. >> whichever comes first. >> let's clarify. holding the staff's recommendation for 90 days, within which time the permit has been issued and the work will be done? if there is an issue, you can come back to us. >> this is a final decision. >> does the national apartment expect to have this done in 90 days? pop >> the case is fairly contentious. there were probably have to be some exploratory work done. 90 days would be very

optimistic. >> dr is back in our department, i think. >> the 25th of october? >> it was. >> once it is issued it can be sent to board of appeals. >> why not do this -- continue it for 90 days? >> alright, let's continue it. i have to say that i would probably be willing to uphold this when it comes back. >> and ending is needed, but we have to be fair.

>> second. >> continued for 90 days. >> can be put in a condition of one clear reports? we need to find out that there is progress. ride a a report and issue will find against her, it is not against. is a violation that occurred because of inappropriate but be

a violation is really not for working through with a permit. the attorney is shaking her head. it has nothing to but i will certainly do. >> we are not asking you do it.

the through the commission secretary? >> yes. >> think your ranch. on that motion? whappin[roll call vote] the motion carried unanimously. what's next item? >> item #6 -- >> next item? >> item #6. address opposite 135 adelphia

del mar. >> is this three minutes for each side to provide an update on discussion only items? >> the department first. >> case #6725 and you currently have documents complying with compliance related to orders of issuance of 2008 and to those nine. and would like to be another record a memorandum from the

planning department, which i received yesterday, the clearing departments that this of permit some of documents. the intent of this memorandum is to document progress from the project sponsor to abate violations. , to get to that point where they are today, plans have been updated under the proposed conditions that will apply with applicable planned submitting an acceptable design on the farm -- on the front portion of the building. no. 3 is submission of a variance application to

legalize the encouragement. and all encroachments above grade shelley documented to be fully maintained on the southern property >> and the questions? >> no. >> average expense line above grade? >> building code does not require permits to be issued for deaths and patio of debt of less than 30 inches above the grave. therefore, we would consider such items to be a simple matter.

-- civil matter. let for? the requirement level? -- >> at the requirement level? >> id is not 30 inches above grade and would therefore not require a building permit. >> for them to put a deck and 30 inches, it would not be enforceable. that pending into a non compliance -- back ending into non compliance could not be for

them to find there are arrayed? >> it with their foreign of our new building permit. less >> when we heard this before one year ago part of the new design. >> currently adapted and submitted in the documents.

for this side in the rear, a as was said? in chile with several buildings in the keating construction that goes back onto the subject. >> think you.

we're there. commissioners, rivers and in the owners of 135 is -- camino del mar. we have been working hard with the planning department to get this through the process. and eventually get to burke regina kilovar et.

quickly i want to run through where we have been. exhibit c shows the chronology. every process over the last 12 months. outlining what their requirements were. at that time we felt we needed a new architect, so we hired more to help us through the planning department. this is really more complex as this involves the redesign of the entire front of the building. june, first submitted plans from july and into july without

more comments backfill a number of times we noticed and held a site with the meetings will we're doing best about moving forward, it should go out in the next week or so. if there is a discretionary view

-- discretionary review -- it will be there if there is a discretionary review application. we will have something to build, hopefully, moving to the board of appeals. there is still a ways to go and i think we have made significant progress. i wanted to thank the department, they have been excellent work with. >> of those notices are going out next week? >> perhaps even this week. >> public comment? >> good morning, commissioners. i will try to explain what is going on here.

he knows three or four times i have sent a copy of the survey to them. they had a copy on file. you can go on these on-line requests for the property. the front of the building is more than 60 feet tall. on the side of the property it needs to be removed. encroaching on the back of the houses, this patio, which is never discussed, must be restored. they know what needs to be done. nothing has been done. according to information from your computer, it is on hold

from january 7 of this year. they submitted some kind of claim, not through the building department. no one knows what is going on. ultimately it needs to be resolved before we move further. nothing to say they will move the cost of the house. they needed some kind of agreement to move forward. the story is not going nowhere. that is what it is all about. this is from your system. if i am not making up stories,

ok? mr. sweeney clearly stated that he would take the investigation. what needs to be done? you have to get the report from the developer. so, you have to do something about it. or you can move forward immediately. >> you have a pretend surveyor? >> correct. >> they have one. >> it is a partial. >> have you ever gotten together to compare?

>> yes. they know exactly what it is. addressing the front, the back, the sides. the rest of it came from nowhere. they know that. >> you say that there is no communication there? [inaudible] ] ... [inaudible] jemaah >> -- a [inaudible] >> -- >> [inaudible] last year the order dated, september 25, you would allow appellants additioti