with the exception to the portions that extend over the property line. and with the exception of the portion to the varyingses of the front setback area. >> thank you for clarifying. commissioner antonini: i think i have some comments on that. i have never -- i understand that there were problems with this and it's been well articulated and i often think this is a d.b.i. issue. i know it is. us and there is a reason to be before u because there was a plan brought forward to create what sing a very well articulated and designed home by toby morris and is. me right now and is somewhat mirrors the structure to the west as far as the articulations and the size and i see no reason why that shouldn't happen and as far as what we do with the vyings and other things are something that i would suggest

be taken up with whatever punitive actions the feels are necessary. and i think you have a snout nosed garage from the old building and i remember driving by there when they are heroically trying to save the thing, which they did and i was wondering if they were going to be able to and what was created after that in the extending beyond the permits that is presented is not very attractive right now. i would agree with that. but i think we have an obligation to the project sponsorses and to the neighbor and to the city and this is a greatway to the presidio and is a visible site and mr. morris has designed what is a very attractive building and that would be my intent to bring this

all the way back and what is structurally the easiest way to do it. there are pooarts that will hav to be torn down to build this and that is more of a construction project and what is most expeditious rather than specifying how much has to be removed. i would be in favor of trying to move towards a final result that is more acceptable. commissioner miguel: commissioner sugaya. commissioner sugaya: a quick question to staff. mr. morris is no longer the architect, is that right? >> that is correct. he is no longer employed by the yees. commissioner sugaya: and to your understanding from both parties, there was no communication in the last six month or whatever. >> there was minimal communication and atechts to communicate and my understanding is the attempts failed.

>> obviously nothing got worked out. >> not to my nobling knowledge or the d.r. requester's. commissioner sugaya: i would like to support the staff motion which would indicate it back five months back or whenever we heard it last to revert back to the 1998 and if that takes an intent so that we can clarify exactly what existed at the time versus what apparently was approved by d.b.i. mistakenly, i am kind of confused on that. >> i think ms. hester is stating the inaccuracy of the plan that was submitted with the permit, the current permit and the current proposal. they are suggesting that there was a modification to be made and presented to you as the 1998 permit and we have the 1998 permit. i don't think ms. hester is suggesting that the plan on file with the department of building

inspection that we have pulled from microfiche is this is something different than what she would like them to be reverted to. there are, on top of that, not to confuse matters worse, but the 1998 permit it is inaccurate. so we're doing the best we can to get it to what the 1998 permit said it should be. but we'll industrial to pull it back off the property line and the property lines were drawn inaccurately in 1998 and the permit was issued without a variance, yada, yada, yada. anyway. i think the draft e.r. memo i provided to you covers what commission eer sugaya's intent would be. commissioner miguel: commissioner moore? commissioner moore: that is the second on commissioner sugaya's motion. i would like to clarify for the

commissioner antonini, once architect morris is no longer under contract with the yee family, his work cannot be used as the basis for approval because he will not be the architect of record. just because you paid for the initial service of the sketch does not entail a legal obligation for us because he is not the architect of record anymore. i would going to say that the number of people which was attended to assist the applicant in this case and them all having disappeared as unnecessarily added to my level of confidence that we have really anything which we can resolve. i think the fact that we have spent considerable amount of time continuing the project and expressing support for everybody to work with each other and have incredible professionals who have done work and is one of the commissioner and have projects approved tells mes that that

there is something amiss here. i am in strong support of the motion as it stands. commissioner miguel: i would be in support of the motion also. i appreciate mr. carey's orig original and present involvement in this. i was very aware and involved in some of the proceedings surrounding the sink hole incident. and was in intimate contact with many of the property owners that were affected during that incident. and it caused a lot of problems for many property owners, without question. but this is an instance where i thought the commission was very absolute in saying either work it out or we will. and this is unfortunate in my mind that we are having to say this more often. and parties haven't had -- and the parties have had enough time

to really sit down and work out any problems and they have failed to do so and we're going to have to do it. commissioner antonini? commissioner antonini: can i talk to project sponsor's representative for a second please? well, i am not happy with this result as nobody is probably because we still don't know what we're ending up with and will end up with a structure that might be reverting back to what it was before or under the plans that were approved which is probably going to be unsatisfactory. would you clients be willing to work with either with mr. morris or another architect to come up with a design that would be mr. acceptable? >> mr. morris is still working with the compliants. commissioner antonini: all right. i did put in a call to him and he did call me back and i did not have time to return the call. he is still as the architect of record. >> absolutely. >> in that case i am going to make a motion to continue --

>> we have a motion -- >> to continue -- >> the motion to continue is this. this is the potential of coming back again and again and even if we were to take staff's motion because there probably will be some other project in the future or there will be something sitting there that is not attractive. and i would like to see this contin continued when we could have mr. morris here and have a definite plan for what it is. and i never had a problem and nor did the commission so much with the plan in may but rather with the procedure and with the work done without benefit of a permit. and i don't really ever see the impact to d.r. requester and i don't see it today other than the fact it that's overgrown and there is some problems with the property. so i would move to continue. commissioner miguel: is there a second? commissioner antonini: we need a date, i guess. secretary avery: do you have a date? commissioner antonini: it would

have to be then. secretary avery: and on the 19th we are proposing a joint hearing with rec park for 18 washington and downtown park fund and some other heavy items. i would not put this on the 19th. commissioner antonini: january 26. commissioner miguel: is there a second to the motion? the motion fails for lack of a second. secretary avery: commissioners -- pardon? i have going to call the question. commissioner miguel: i just want to make a comment. and i might have supported that motion had the architect been here. but i think the fact that the project sponsor is not even bringing their architect after all this speaks volumes. >> appreciate the comment. secretary avery: the motion on the floor is to take d.r. and

approve the project per the recommendation on the draft submitted by staff. commissioner antonini? >> no. >> commissioner borden? >> aye. >> commissioner fong? >> aye. >> commissioner moore? >> aye. >> commissioner miguel? secretary avery: that motion passed 5-1 with commissioner antonini voting against and on the variance. >> and to close the public hearing of the item and i was not at the hearing on may 19 and kelly under was acting and i did restrew tape and was -- i did review the tape and am prepared to make a decision on that to grant the rear yard variance to tex tent that is required for the 1998 permit and with the design for the scope beyond the 1998 permit and to wrap up about what happens next. and your decision will be final and we would ask them to

submitted revised plans and they can appeal that to the board of appeals and pursue enforcement action if they fail to respond. make to make clear what will happen next. commissioner miguel: thank you very much. i appreciate putting that to the record. commissioner miguel: is there any general public comment on items that are not on the agenda? none appearing, public comment is closed. and it's 4:13. we're finished. >> amazing. >> yes.

>> sfgtv, we are ready to begin.

>> good morning today is wednesday, october 19, 2011. this is a regular meeting of the building inspection commission. at this time, i would like to remind everyone to please turn off all electronic devices the first item on the agenda is roll-call. president hechanova, commissioner clinch, commissioner murphy, commissioner walker. commissioner lee is expected. supervisor mar and oak commissioner romero excused. the next thing on the agenda is president's announcement hackettstown -- announcements. >> good morning. welcome to our october meeting. first, i would like to really encourage everyone, given that the lawn of prieta earthquake took place almost three decades ago comments and the category of

we need to do more, and we need to do it now, and i am looking forward to some strong support of the community, but also with the city. i would also like to just bring attention to those that have really continued to provide the level of service to the community in the category of where letters of appreciation have come out, especially from patricia evans, who was recognizing duane ferrell as part of this better service to the community, and also for michael gunnell, who was named in an article in the biscayne

times, an article that really lauded san francisco's building department. it was an article from october of this year. it is really good reading. and that is it. thank you. >> ok, item number three, update on earthquake safety implementation program -- sorry, is there public comment on the president's announcements? seeing nine, item number three. the earthquake safety implementation program/capss. >> good morning, commissioners. director sweeney, thank you for the invitation to come back. in conjunction with the 20th -- the 22nd anniversary of the loma prieta earthquake, there was a press release announcing the availability of the draft plan

bank. i know when i was here last, i let you know about the version of the plan that was then current. this is now supposedly available on the city administrators website. so we are continuing to get the word out on this plan, and it does, as pointed out last time, include the timeline that lists the 50 different projects and programs that we hope to accomplish over the next 30 years. this is now in the public realm. we are continuing to actively talked to various groups about this, to build support. we have had further meetings and discussions with representatives of the harvard kennedy school, with the tenants' group, with the apartment owners group, so we are continuing to get the word out. i think taking the step of releasing it publicly, having it on the website is a great next step, to just continue to educate and build support for

these proposed programs. we're very excited to see that come out. i am excited to continue having those discussions. i am also working with the disaster council, with staff to get the schedule for the upcoming disaster meeting, to do a presentation for those folks. i have not yet started engaging with chief hayes-white, but i would like to get it scheduled for the fire commission as well, and just give them a briefing as well. we are pressing forward. there are some slight changes to this version, i think, from the version i talked about the last time i was here. mostly just some changes to the timeline. other than that, if you have specific questions about that, i will ask laurens to come out and help address that. but it is by and large, as discussed previously and as proposed. continuing to press ahead, and would be happy to come back at a further future date to give you further updates.

commissioner walker: thank you for coming in and talking to us about this important project we have all been working on together. is there any update about potential funding? we have looked at the potential of miller brews coming together to support a bond for our next round of strengthening, especially the soft story wood frame buildings. have you identified any improvement in that arena? >> there have been encouraging developments with respect to the melarus financing. they adopted a plan recently that would allow that type of financing for solar energy upgrades. we have gone back to our outside on the council to request an opinion from them, because the previously wanted this to stop,

given the uncertainty with the federal government, fannie mae and freddie mac. so we have gone back and said if this other city or county can do this, can you please revisit whether we can do it, and we're thinking specifically for this program, although there may also be an advantage to take effort of it for solar. we are waiting, but we're hopeful that we will have good news. with respect to any future bond, i certainly think that has to be on the table for discussion for financing possibilities. that is why it is so important to keep having these conversations, keep getting out there, talking to any interested groups, making sure that everyone understands how important this is. so if we get to a point where we do say, you know, this is an element of this program that we really have to seek approval for general obligation bonds to finance it, hopefully we will have that groundswell of support and understanding of the importance that will allow us

to have a successful bond campaign, as opposed to what happened last year with prop a. commissioner walker: thank you for the work you're doing, and thank you to lawrence. >> thank you. thank you again for your continued support. >> since we ended this back to the city, it left the jurisdiction of dbi. can you tell us a little bit about what has happened since? what kind of progress you have made since that time, 6, 8, 10 months ago? >> sure, the biggest progress is the drafting of this report. >> i have a copy of that. >> and the public release is the next step in that. and just putting together a 30- year project timeline that contains those 50 different projects. >> ok.

i was not sure what commissioner walker's question was regarding the bonds. what is the bond for? all homeowners? >> it is for private property owners to ask the city to look at options to help them fund the programs that we have been looking at in order to make sure that the buildings here are safe. it is to help the private property owners seismically strengthen their homes in the form of loans that are hopefully affordable for these folks. president hechanova: that is wishful thinking on my part. >> a great, glad you support it. >> i also wanted to let the commission know that jason elliott, who has really been very involved in all this and very supportive on the mayor's office behalf is here, if you want to hear a few words from him. thank you. >> jason elliott, mayor's

legislative director. i have nothing past what the city administrator said other than that the mayor is fully supportive of the plan that you have an stands behind amy as she implements this. he is willing to dedicate his time and energy to this. thank you. >> i do have a question for mr. cornfield. could you just share with us, one of the prime objective suspend the category of shelton place and some of the legislative wording that has -- that has come about to help bring about a category that has really provided an opening for that definition, through fema and other categories, that will allow for our ability to really respond to this impending disaster. >> i will say a couple words

about shelter and place. one of the biggest concerns that we all have is that after an earthquake, we could have a lot of folks that either displaced into temporary shelters or buildings are damaged and they go to longer-term interim housing. how are we going to deal with sheltering needs? and through fema and other federal sponsorships, the city, through the city administrator's office and other agencies, is working with spur to develop a shelter in place concept, which says that we're going to be trying to encourage people to stay as much as possible in their homes during the emergency and post-emergency time, so we can make the emergency plans and gain a neighborhood lovell of involvement and support. we realize that will require a

commitment on the city's part to make up the difference of services that are not provided with an someone's home. so you may be in your home without sewer, water, he, or something, but you have a structurally safe place. you can have your goods and assets and be within your community. the city then has to make up some of the differences in the neighborhood community, like providing services for who knows what, mail pick up, the things that are not provided in the shelter and place. maybe water, toilets, something like that. the whole concept of shelter and place is one that changes from let's find space in the parks and put up tents or whatever id is, emergency shelter and demands for a long time spans, to find ways to keep people in their homes, to set reasonable standards so we can deal with the tens of thousands of people who we think are going to be either displaced or feel like they should be displaced.

so these are alternate emergency periods have the ability standards that will probably come before this commission at some poin hechanova: the strong concept here is also a neighbor-helping-neighbor with in the vicinity of each other's homes. >> that is right. this is very much a community- based concept. president hechanova: thank you very much. >> what i would like to see is when the homeowners apply for permits, such as a bathroom at remodel or kitchen remodel, basically all remodels, that there should be demand on them at that time to do some simple tie downs, foundation bolts, that kind of thing. it should be mandatory. that is something we should look

at. that would keep people in their houses. we did that whole thing a few years ago out in berkeley where you had that demonstration of shaking the building, and the first thing to go with the garage, soft story downstairs. maybe a little bit of steel across that opening alone would do. and the back at the garage, some sheer wall there and just bolt them, tied them down. president hechanova: i am very pleased to hear you speak about that. it has been my impression, and sound like yours as well, that it does not cost a lot to make improvements to buildings. the first $200 goes a really

long way in improving safety. >> i figure $5,000 to $10,000 extra. and you are seismically upgraded. and it does not have to go overboard. it does not have to become a huge engineering cost. it is is simple common sense. >> thank you. commissioner walker: i think those are the details that we actually have in that book. and i know all of us have been very frustrated at how long this takes, for something you can do so much to avoid damage. but when you make it mandatory, you have to make sure the engineering is correct. as you know, we actually contracted with structural engineers of northern california to give us very specific details so we could put it through our code advisory board and get the right details so we're not

misleading people with incorrect engineering. i think those parts are done and delivered to us. hopefully we can start rolling out mandatory fixes. >> [unintelligible] i have seen a lot of engineers in that room. as far as the small buildings are concerned, the single-family houses and two units are complicated. the homeowners can go out and get an engineer of their choice and have them engineer it. we're not inventing the calculator. commissioner walker: i am not an engineer, but -- you know. >> i have also participated in some of the meetings that have taken place. and we're trying to, or at least the intent here is to simplify some of the details that could really be home-improvement categories that could help to expedite higher level of safety,

especially in the shelter and place. that would help to bring about the home improvement category. and then also, one of the things that i think will be instrumental in all this implementation program is also part of what we're implementing right now, at the pts, the permit tracking system, which will also help to expedite some of the permitting as a result of some of the damage that would occur and helping to, one, facilitate the permit the which is also a category. potentially mobile units could go out and helped the more distressed neighborhoods that could really help expedite some of the replacement, if not renovation, if not repair, and some of the earthquake damage that has come about. i think the trajectory of what this report has provided has really been