more affordable than the larger units, which have some fairly large buildings, given the fact there is still a multiplier that applies in volume -- applies value. the question that makes me sway in between is while studying the fact the building was moved through a state action and the fact that it is difficult to finance is that the rear property has no parking. when we had these other cases, and i am trying to decide whether i want to be consistent or not, the one i voted for also have rear parking.

the front building was massive, so in my opinion it was over- untitled. give me another moment. >> i appreciate the comments. gooi am slightly torn in my feelings, and the reasons being part of both challenges, and planning looked carefully at the situation, and given the constraints going forward, it does bother me there is no parking, but i think issue the house got moved there as well,

someone in voluntarily is also an important factor, so that is where my leanings are at this point. >> i am of a firm mind on this one. is it legitimate to open this up? i think it is extraordinary the building had been moved to this lot when it was legal to do so. i think this means that standard, so it was legal. when i look at this, this is a different point of view. is it a hardship? i felt like absolutely there was a hard shove, and the idea you would dismiss these factors,

there are differential rules, so therefore, it is perfectly reasonable, and i would make the same point if one were to drive by tomorrow, you would not know the difference. it is not going to have any effect whatsoever on neighborhood character or those types of issues. it is hard to keep track on what the regulations are currently. we talked about requirements for loans. if this were to be built today, i do not know if i would know

what though parking requirements would be. it seems like it is a moving requirement. it didfar this property was froe transit lines and all of that. i would assume it is not bad. that does not bother me. i feel like there is no demonstration of abuse or error on the part of the zoning administrator. i intend to uphold this variance. >> i have come to a conclusion sure i. what has swayed me at this point is the fact that this configuration, and this amount

of building on this particular lot was not the specific actions of this property owner. contrary to the other one, i am prepared to support the variants. >> are you willing to move it? >> commissioner fung, is that on the basis of no error? >> that is correct. >> we have a motion from commissioner fung to deny the appeal on the basis there was no error by the zoning administrator. president garcia: aye.

vice president hwang: aye. commissioner goh: no. >> the granting of this variance is up held. vice president hwang: we will move on to item number 12. francis mcdonald vs department of building inspection. the property at 340 spuruce street. permit to alter a building. application number 201130 four zero. we will begin with the appellant. >> good evening, my name is francis mcdonald.

>> if you would pull the microphone closer. >> week, the tenants, on this building -- we, the tenants, of this building have been penalized when they hire unqualified contractors who do work beyond the scope of a permit when i do request to permit. as they did in the case of -- construction to read it was not a certified contractor at the time they began their work. they did corps' work. by the end of their work they did get to the certification needed. when they started, and they were

not abatement certified. i'm trying to show you a pattern. the plans you see in front of you are misrepresented of of the structure as it exists today. because of this misrepresentation, and neighbors will lose their chance to weigh in on the construction. it seems obvious to the tenants that the intended goal of the owners and their attorney and property manager is to even to tenants so they can rid the building of leaseholders and long-term renters and turned it into condominiums or whatever they're going to do with it. they have tried to prove that i do not live there but the court of san francisco ruled in my favor as the qualified tenants.

it was the tenants who first called the city to note the violations in the first place. when their calls for unanswered by the owner, we suffer from the harassment that their attorney has been able to spin out of the notice of the violation. so, too, are unsanitary conditions. what is to stop the owners and their attorney from beginning a staircase project and then abandoning it after demolition? like they did to the bathroom. they went in without a permit and they tore out the whole bathroom. she still does not have a bathroom. what if there is a fire?

they have shown they applied to do things and have not done a proper job of it. i do not want to be running out the back door and have no steps. the property management lacks is a good track record of fixing things. the prime example is the bathroom. fixing a week turned into a demolition puree-- leak turned a demolition. they act as if the fire escape is nothing. we're going to fix the stairs. who is to say they will do a good job? they have not done a good job of much else. i ask the board to grant the appeal and deny the permit until the work required to be done is completed without the

threat of eviction or anything. that is eight months without a bathroom. i think it is reasonable. representation of the construction, to the city of san francisco, i think that would be proper. showing ask that we are doing things in good faith. i do not have a problem or the -- with the owner or the attorney. i would like things to get done in a proper manner. i feel bad when people are living without the bathroom because they got it prepared to fix a leak and they demolished a bathroom. that is what my appeal is for. and i am sorry i am shaking a little bit. i do not speak in public.

that's it. >> to you have any photos? >> yes, i do. i have photos of the back of the building. this is where the steps are. they are concealed. it is not really -- let's see if i can get it. this is the building from the back. the steps need to be done but i do not think the contractor they have hired is the one that should be doing it. i think they have not shall -- shown contractors who have finished on time. they wanted her to use a port- a-potty.

>> can we see that photograph again? >> that is the back of the building. >> looking toward -- >> this is from another yard looking up toward the staircase. the staircases go like this. a zig-zag. these windows have been blown out for years. the back of the building is representative of the things they would let go picking and that the shape of the building. nobody brought it to the city's attention. they would have left it like this. this is presidio heights. the back of the building looks like this. a fire or the neighbors, i would not want to look at this with a $2 million house. i would like them -- my appeal

to be granted until they can prove they are in good faith to make the building better. one thing would be putting in that bathroom. vice president hwang: how long have you lived there? >> i moved there earlier this year. last year, 2011. vice president hwang: is the condition of urine and is in disrepair? >> my unit is fine. it is not the greatest unit. if a fixture bathroom, i would probably spend my money and fix my bathroom. i have a place i go to on the weekends.

i like the building. i just think that -- you are the only people who cannot deny or force him to give her a bathroom and live like a human being. i think that would show good faith. thank you very much. sorry it took half the night to get through this. >> mr. president, commissioners, my name is mark epstein i am the attorney for the owner of the building. i have with me the architect who drew the plans. he is here to answer any questions you might have. commissioner fung asked for

photographs. i have a few more. here is one of that shows bracing that was done by the former owner. rather than replace the stairs as we hope to do. some additional bracing here. it was done by mr. rossi. and another area that was done that needs to be fixed with perhaps. the stairs need to be replaced. there are disputes between the owners. it is unfortunate that i thought we had reached a negotiation and then she wanted it done in

accordance with the rent ordinance. that meant her eight year lease was terminated. we are at an impasse again. we stand ready to do the bathroom. since then, she called out the environmental protection department. and there are lead paint issues. she needs to move out for us to do that work. it is indisputable with the lead paint. the entire building was cited for lead paint. a contractor who is going to be doing the stairs did a painting on the three outside walls. that has been signed off on. as far as i now, it was all done well with proper relations with the tenants and within a

reasonable time. the contractor we're using for the stairs is a contractor that i believe will meet the requirements of the owner and the tenants. he made it clear to him that the relationship with the tenants, because of the factor of relationship, it is important. my client has spent money in getting the plans drawn by a licensed architect. we spent months of dealing with getting the permit approved, going 3 planning process, having it reviewed and approved. the job needs to be done. we found the right contractors to do the job. they have that part of the work. i ask that the board overturned the appeal and allow the work to continue. again, our architect is here.

he have some plans if you have specific questions. >> why did your client wait until the property was nov'd to fix the steps? >> we did not. we had emergency repairs done. we were stopped from completing those repairs and then when we discussed it, the permit was modified to do emergency repairs. we had been in the process of obtaining a loan. we did a set of drawings before the building was sold. there was no waiting. it happened in the middle of the process. >> perhaps your architect could answer couple of questions.

>> it is hard to read the drawings but could you provide the existing conditions as part of this package? >> what we did was to submit the 2000 drawings. >> please identify yourself. >> my name is paul. i am the architect of record. i do not think we did it -- we drew the rear yard situation. that includes the stairs in question here. we did not draw the existing unit. they are the same location, the same configuration as the

existing. >> the balding -- building permit was issued by the building inspector. the permit was applied for and reviewed by sending planning and also by our building code people, including an engineer. i did notice on the drawings there's a lot of details for attachments. it looks like a complete set of plans for doing a stair replacement. when you do this, the code allows you some leverage with regards to installing a winder

on the stairs. because of property issues, we're tied to a space. i do not see anything wrong with any plan or permit. the point about the stairs -- we would ask that they maintain a safe exit. they have to put a scaffold up or something. in the event of a fire, the tenants are able to get out. of course if they say that it is not safe, we will work with the tenants and to make sure that stairs are provided. at all times during construction. any questions, i can answer them. >> are there parameters on how

long this can take? i don't think someone wants to go down scaffolding on a rainy night if there is a fire. is there some rule? >> is a good question curious people like jobs to happen fast. everybody knows it should not take 12 months to do this. if they are under a notice of violation we could move environment -- which could force an order of abatement or a lien on the property if it did not comply within the timeframe of the violation. we would try to get them to do it as quick as possible. knowingly permit is good for 12 months. this could go to an enforcement. it could move through the process if the stairs were not

rebuilt. stairs are part of the building and we want them done fast. we could move a notice of a violation toward enforcement to make sure they get done in a timely fashion what is going to get them is code enforcement which is not what anybody wants. >> i do not want to describe the attitude in but it seems as though we felt our hands were tied and the bassoon was a rent control issue. there is no way you can force them, no code violations to not provide a proper bathroom for a tenant. >> that is a good question. that may be something for housing. i do not know what the

situation is. i cannot imagine a after not being in operation for eight months. we could get involved in that. absolutely. if there is something civil going on, that would take precedence over us. that may be what is happening. but we could look into it and see what is going on and find out if there is anything that to the code could do to hurry it up. if it is a civil action we will stay away from it. >> on a code-related issue, is there relief from fire? >> yes, you do not have to do the fire walls.

i am perturbed by the pictures of the back of the building. it does not look the best. again, i think we should look into that from housing inspection. that photograph looks like there is a lot of light going on. that would be something -- it could be part of a nearly year violation. i know we have a bunch of complaints on this building. somersault, some not resolved. some of them are held up because of appeals. that back wall did not look the best in the photograph. >> it also looks like it does not matched the drawing. >> it is hard to tell. some issues with the building.

inspection services could get involved in the bathroom tissue and the maintenance of the building. i think they are. i do not have anything with me tonight. >> we will take public comment. >> thank you. to the comments he made earlier about giving a forum for people who do not have attorneys, i appreciate you remembering the details of my bathroom. i stand here today eight months later, six months after i saw you, with no bathroom. about the rent board, they

rolled in my favor. the rent board does not have the authority to make the bathroom go back and. inspection has been out three times. i have a trial date set for july 2012. must i wait until then for a superior court to rule if i should have a bathroom? i only see that u.s. the people who can put permits through, i have been flexible about this. i have been waiting for a long time. if there is a way to put a contingency about letting the permits go through, if they were to address my bathroom, or if we could go into the hallway and come to an arrangement, that would be nice. just being here tonight caused me to hear other cases that made me realize that this as-built

plan shows of this area is fine and does not need to be touched. but it is going to be touched. it is proper that people who live in the area are noticed about a construction project. that is what i've picked up from being in the room tonight. a drawing that was made in 2000, this was taken today. this is what it looks like. how can we stay here? they're not in the plans to be touched. fyi, the lead paint was probably the highest next to my kitchen. am i done? thank you.