that is why we are not recommending saving them. however, if the board directed us to do a phased removal, we could start at the end of the block. president peterson: did you personally go to the site? >> i was one of the arborists who did the initial the vibration of the trees. president peterson: i think the appellate stated that all the chinese elms were going to be taken, where as you stated that one would be left? >> i can look at my notes and get back on that to you. president peterson: there is concern because we have heard from the appellant that at least one attempt to reach out to someone in your department got no response.

i know i have seen you hear many times. i think in recent hearings you had awesome coordination with people that were going to be affected by your department decisions. what would your coordinated efforts look like if you could envision a post-hearing decision where we would uphold -- if we were to uphold your department's position? what would your coordinated efforts to look like? >> -- commissioner hwang: >> would meet with any neighbors who were interested to discuss the replacement and species selection. we frequently attend meetings outside of regular work hours. we could certainly do that. the reason there was no response was because this was scheduled for the board of appeals. once we have a director's order at the board of appeals, we do not have the authority to meet and make a compromise. so we would absolutely be

willing to meet with the neighbors on their time frame as much as we could coordinate. commissioner hwang: the department would convene a meeting and invite instead of wait for members of the community to knock on your door? >> we have been given direction as a result of this hearing that we should coordinate with them. we would ask them -- i mean i would ask them to talk to each other, those who are interested. in some cases, we have sent notices to every property on the block. we could do that if there was an interesting that. president peterson: commissioners, the matter is before you. commisssioner fung: commissioners, i would concur with the department assessment of these trees. a think it is time for renewal

of these trees. given the economic time, the fact that they have resources to do it at this point -- it makes sense to proceed. president peterson: personally, i think the photographs presented by the department were very compelling. i would also -- i am leaning to uphold. vice president goh: i would agree with that, and the fact of the trees are at least 62 years old, probably older. if i were in neighbor who had been looking out on those trees for several decades, i would be in tears on the day they came and cut the tree down. i wonder if there was maybe some way we could require the city to put in a larger, taller tree in replacement. i do not know. i mean i would be in favor of

phasing, except we are in the windy, stormy season. i would be afraid someone would get hurt by a falling tree. the do not know how the other commissioners might feel about larger replacement trees. commissioner hwang: we did hear ms. short talk about a 36 inch box for one of the properties. is that something you could address? instead of the 24 inch? >> a 36 inch box treat is something the department can plant. it is a little bit more of a challenging coordinating process, because we have to use a crane to install those trees. but it is a possibility. it is more expensive. the trees themselves are more expensive, although not

substantially so. we do have much more staff time, and we have to pay for the crane operator's time in order to do that. but those conditions have been imposed on others and on the department in the past. vice president goh: how much taller is the tree at 24 versus 36? >> it depends on the species. if we are talking about the break chinese alpine -- drake chinese elm, i just bought some for another project where they are paying for the installation cost. those were about -- i would say there were about 9 feet or 10 feet tall. they do have a more substantial trunk, usually, by at least an inch or two. you do get a bigger tree with a 36 inch box. in some species, it is much

bigger. in others, it is more about the trunk and the height. vice president goh: how did these trees and their disease come to your attention, in your department's attention? >> received two calls from residents on the block. president peterson: "36 inch block replacement -- would that be something that would be appropriate for this block in terms of the larger size, the larger white? >> certainly. if you are asking if there are constraints that would prevent the larger size, and no. commissioner garcia: i think we should leave it open that if the

neighbors want to make a concerted effort of, owners could observe the difference between what the tree would cost. i personally would be very uncomfortable to stand in front of the dpw at this point. we have serious liability issues here. beyond that, if you were to launch proceedings before this board having to do with trees, you would know you are in really good hands. ms. sharp has an incredible record of advocating extremely strongly for preserving trees whenever possible. if this could be faced, if there could be some mitigation, the guarantee you she would be the one recommended it. she does not do this whimsically. i intend to uphold the

department. president peterson: i still think there could be opportunity for phasing. i am most particularly concerned on the impact of the harem. i do not see how you buy about a total population. he and perhaps his mate would have a chance to readjust. there was agreement that there are -- that there are three trees that stand out as the worst contenders. there could be a discussion of the remaining trees. i am alone on the phasing. that is where my vote would be inclined. vice president goh: president peterson, is the face an idea that the trees in the worst shape would be removed with an eye for the other trees to see

if there recover, or in a certain time? president peterson: i think a chance for renewal in other areas. eventually, they would all be replaced. vice president goh: and then how would the decision be made to remove the ones in the worst shape? president peterson: the testimony tonight was that the three worst were all found on the southeast corner. those on the north side, from the neighbor of's perspective, had helped the canopies.

commisssioner fung: madam president, would you like a motion? president peterson: i would. commisssioner fung: i am prepared to make a motion. i will move to uphold the department. president peterson: call the roll, please. >> we have a motion from commissioner fung to uphold this permit. on that motion -- vice president goh: um, can you start on the other side? commissioner garcia: aye. president peterson: no.

commissioner hwang: aye. vice president goh: i am going to vote no. i am torn. if my vote does not make a difference, i am going to vote no. >> the vote is 3-2. the permit is upheld. president peterson: >> welcome back to the december 15, 2010, meeting of the board of appeals, the last meeting of this board for this year. mr. pacheco, could you call item no. 6, please? secretary pacheco: item number six, appeal number 10-076,

raymond berrios vs. the department of building inspection, 750 andover street, protesting the issuance on july 2, 2010, to jose berrios, and electrical permit. >> please step forward. you have three minutes, sir. >> good evening, commissioners. i and the aged and architect for the permit holder, the legal property owner of the residence at 750 andover. the last time that we left, you

requested three items. one is that we performed a sound reading at the site, which we have done. the second item was to possibly study alternative locations for the compressor unit, which was at the time located below the bedroom window of the tenant who filed the appeal. the third item was to present the schedule, which we did at the last meeting, but we have reviewed the schedule that we discussed previously, and we will present another schedule. i performed a sound measurement at the site twice during the

same week. i used what is called -- i have worked with them before, and i did this down measurements at the site. i did four measurements each day. the second was at 11:00, and the fourth was at 5:00.

because of its self will measure 3 readings. there is also the maximum, and for whatever duration period that i said before, -- the maximum highest discipline rating was 92.4 decibels. this was extremely high and when the traffic is at its highest. the lowest was at 2:00, 2:15 that day. [bell] can i continue?

on the second day, which was thursday, december 2, the discipline rating was -- commissioner hwang: let's stop there. is this your submission? >> i do have copies of this. commissioner garcia: did you apply -- supplied this to the appellant? this was not to hearing oral presentation at the last minute that was also due to the appellant. commissioner hwang: do you have the copies right now with you? can you give one to the

appellant? he has already read into the thing. commissioner fung: you also mentioned the location? >> yes, and after looking at all of the locations, we decided that none of the locations was suitable, so we decided to locate the compressor unit in the existing garage, in the corner, and that is the corner that is furthest from any of the neighbors. that is at the corner of benton and andover.

vice president goh: -- commissioner garcia: how is that different? >> it was the ground window. it was to the opposite side of the building. and, again, it is going to be enclosed in the closets, acoustically insulated, and hopefully reduce to 60 decibels or less, which is about the december reading without the compressor reading, and as far as the schedule, originally, we have the schedule for the weekdays to be between 9:00 a.m. and --

we would like to propose that she be allowed to do her work. commissioner hwang: can you put the picture of the site of again, please? >> sure. the original location was back here in the rear yard. the rear property line is here, and we have decided that the best location in the existing garage, -- commissioner hwang: who lives

above the garage? tenants one? i am asking questions. is there a problem? i am asking questions for clarification, so attended one is -- so tenant one is -- and tenant two is up there, so it would be in the garage, ok, thank you. commissioner garcia: 50 ambient db's are 60 -- if the ambient db's are 60 -- >> it might be possible to do it to 63. it does what to the noise level? -- commissioner garcia: it does

what to the noise level? it would blend? >> yes. commissioner garcia: ok. i am sure the other side would have another opinion. president peterson: ok, let's hear from the other side. >> i did not even know we were making a presentation. they failed to follow the brief. we reached out to them twice after the hearing, inviting them to come into the unit. i understand the issue of ambient noise outside. incoming calls. i left this hearing two months ago expecting them to make a request to come into my unit or

my clients unit with a sound detecting advise. they would turn on the unit, or there would be one that would match the decibels, and we would see how loud it is in the unit. i do not care how loud it is outside. i care how loud it is in his bedroom, ok? i reached out to the architect twice. no response. the architect was outside ones. my client wasted in, and we were waved off. i am a little angry about being blindsided by this hearing, and they make this presentation. the correct way with a bid to take a measurement inside his bedroom. now, they did show up a couple of days ago and turned on the unit outside. i was not present. they actually had to knock on the door because they blew out his circuit, and the window shades were shaking it was so loud, so moving it against the garage means that the window

blinds in the living room are going to shake, but ambien noise does not cancel out, and this commission asked for tests inside the unit. they failed to do so. to hand me this stuff makes no sense, and the other thing that is crazy, it is his garage, so i am not sure why they think they can install a piece of equipment from underneath his bedroom window in a garage he is currently renting. i believe the commission said to do the tests. they asked to the printer to bay -- but they asked to basically event my client. >> there is bias.

a consultant would be hired to do a proper testing. the garage, i have a retaining wall. this is only going to create another situation, and there will be more noise. i do not think this is being handled in a manner that afforded us the ability to verify everything in a professional manner. thank you. president peterson: we have a question for you. the garage is yours? >> i have lived in this home for

20 years. i had the garage door seals. people connected with my family coming in. so subsequently, with the new tenant coming in, i was trying to maintain my privacy and secure my materials. this garage has been mined for the last 20 years and will continue to be. yes, with regard to the test, last thursday, i believe it was -- president peterson: i did not ask about the test. i wanted to know, and you answered. vice president goh: what

happens with the test? >> last thursday, i was in a lot of pain. they were attempting to turn the compressor on. they ran an extension cord out to the compressor. i was already medicated and dealing with my pain. vice president goh: they were trying to turn the compressor on at its current location which was outside of the window. got it. >> it stayed on for about 1.5 minutes, and then they turned it off. vice president goh: it was not in the garage, the compressor? >> the existing location where it is at right now. vice president goh: thank you. president peterson: mr. kornfield, anything to add? vice president goh: i have a question for mr. kornfield.

commissioner fung had asked last time what are the permits that are needed for this kind of a thing. i think the question about permits might have been directed -- >> i can give you my opinion at the moment, if you like. there are the electrical permits to provide electrical service, in this involves the equipment itself in the backyard. -- and this involves the equipment itself. i know it is a large and heavy piece of equipment. i would not consider it to be a serious safety hazard. typically, notwithstanding outside of this case, other

than the letter of system, i cannot actually imagine that we would require a building permit for the compressor itself. if it was in a location where it might block an exit or cause a hazardous condition, perhaps we would consider that, but the foundation itself is not a structural issue. i just do not think that this rises to a level -- it is not specifically exempts either. vice president goh: at the last hearing, and maybe this came from mr. sanchez, sorry if it did, but because it needed a permit, it needed a permit because the foundation would be for rebar, anchor bolts, something called "ice a laters

-- "isolators," and i do not know what that is compound but -- >> i do not think it rises to the level of meeting a permit for those elements. vice president goh: ok, thank you. commissioner garcia: mr. kornfield, is it your opinion that this board should consider the effects of noise on neighbors and tenants? >> i think that is a legitimate concern for the board, and i say that because the building code since 1974 has addressed noise concern for individual -- for residential units. noise concerns have to be addressed to reduce outside noise, between us, as well, so i think it is in the legitimate code issue, one that would be legitimately be before the board, in my you personal