there. it is unsafe. it does not have permits. it does not have the correct permits for planning or electrical. there's only one apartment -- it is an unsafe unit. they cannot live there. they still rented out to people even though it is unsafe. the on the way you can protect an unknowing tenant in the future is to put a restriction on the deeds of that it has been called to the attention of the san francisco rich ordinance. does that make sense? rex know, but that is all right. -- >> no, but that is all right. >> good evening, members of the commission. stephen macdonald for the permit holder responding. respectfully, i suggest that the notation on the agenda is actually inaccurate. two months ago, when we were here i think i convinced this

panel that the authority cited by the court of appeal makes it impossible for this commission to order the legalization of this illegal unit. that was not met with any rebuttal. then the statement was made that the tenant is a student and would like to finish her semester. the commission members then looked at each other and decided what to do. it was decided by this commission that the hearing would be postponed for two months so that the student tenant could finish her semester. in my mind, that implied that this meant that there was no way this appeal could be granted. permit was perfectly necessary, as cited by counsel, to a

dangerous, illegal unit. it is stated here that the purpose of a continuance was to allow dbi to conduct a life safety inspection. i respectfully submit that was not the purpose. i argued that this is an illegal and dangerous unit and please allow us to promptly remove it. mr. duffy was told to go out there and in the meantime inspected and report back to this body in case there were life-threatening conditions. that did not happen. but i think it is an unfortunate mistake tuzee the purpose of a continuance was to allow for the inspection. the purpose of a continuance was to allow her to finish her semester at the end of may, and in the meantime, to protect her safety, see if there were life- threatening conditions. that is all moot now. she has had her two months. the elderly, and i would state,

mentally unsound, sr. mr. feeley, he has had some patterns of renting illegal units before. what does this have to do with this illegal permit? no one has given this board any reason to approve this appeal. thank you. >> any other public comment? it looks like inspector duffy would like to address the board. >> sorry, commissioners. i need to correct something i stated in my earlier statement. there was another address in my brief for 1607 40 fifth ave. i think the commissioners asked me where that case was. i was speaking of the 1607 47 avenue case. but the 1208 the 45th avenue

case that we are discussing, it had similarities. there was a studio basement apartment, 10 by 20, a sprinkler head in the ceiling, and a sink and bathroom and refrigerator. i misspoke on the notice of violation. both addresses were on the brief. >> i have a question. mr. duffy, it seems to me the arguments made by the appellant are going to a course of problematic conduct in reprinting -- rerenting units.

i would agree with council about the things that are at issue are not at issue. the concern is raised whether dbi would enforce -- sure the unit be taken off the market? and the tenant be evicted? is there going to be some follow-up on the part of the department? >> i think there should be. certainly, if we issue a first notice of violation and a second. if it is not adhered to, it should go to the city attorney's office. that action takes -- you know, we get liens on properties and stuff. i would say it takes a long time for that to happen, and eventually it does. but a lot of these cases, especially illegal dwelling units, they seem to get caught up in the illegal enforcement. if this unit was not removed and it did not receive a final

inspection, it should follow through with the enforcement action. i do not know how this can happen from this board to dbi, but it said -- which should certainly happen. >> please -- president garcia: please correct me if i'm -- >> please correct me if i'm wrong, it ensures your department's role in the taking of these measures. >> many times we will go out there and the kitchen will be gone, the stove will be gone, and then a week later, it is back again. for this case, if they do a final inspection and all of that is capped off and moved in, then we could do the final of bashan. --it should happen quicker.

whenever there is a permit issued, and sometimes if there's a complaint, that will hold up the works because sometimes they have a valid permit. it is frustrating it does not happen quicker. i think that is what you're saying. >> ok, thank you. >> i have a question for the appellants attorney. have you had discussions with the property owner, with the lawyer for the property owner about the tenancy since we last met? rex there is a lawsuit involved. we have discussed -- >> there is a lawsuit involved. we have discussed mediation. that is the resolution. >> so nothing is resolved yet? >> not yet.

>> and if the permit is granted, then what happens? >> if the permit is granted, either the victor or as part of the mediation -- we can agree to a move that date. there are lots of steps that we can take. -- we can agree to a moved up date. there are lots of steps that we can take. >> can we get confirmation that your client has completed her school year? >> yes. you have graduated? >> ok, thank you. >commissioners, a master have other questions, the matter is submitted. -- >> commissioners, unless you have other questions, the matter is submitted. >> there are obviously some

actions that are outside the purview of this particular body. the permit in question relates to primarily the capping of utilities. i think that the owner of the property is being faced with something that he needs to act upon and we should allow that to proceed after word. -- afterward. i would like to recommend that we condition approval and shorten the time frame so that this thing gets done and some resolution occurs, at least as far as we can make it. and i would recommend that upon the issuance of the permit and,

obviously, any authorized changes, i think it should be completed within three months. madam director, you look puzzled. >> i'm just contemplating the board's authority to condition the issuance upon which it is completed. -- to condition the issuance of time upon which it is completed.

>> there have been cases in the past -- i think what the vice president was saying is may be on upon release of our notice of decision that you would want the work completed within three months, and that this permit be final within three months. is that what the condition would be? >> yes, but i'm thinking that there may be other options to delay the issuance. >> well, this is an issue permit. the time frame to execute the permit was told by the appeal. once we release our notice of decision, dbi will recalculate the modification time frame. and in the past we have said that we want the work done in a quicker time frame. >> the only downside of that would be -- this is a suggestion

that i would tend to agree with, given what mr. duffy has stated, that sometimes the work does not get done quickly. but in this case, given that there is what appears to be contentious litigation -- >> [inaudible] >> i am still speaking. but it seems to me that it would not be a result that we would want, to expedite the eviction. but yes, now i would like to hear you. >> thank you. sorry to interrupt. we would stipulate to an expedited completion of the work. we are most interested in proceeding with the work, proceeding with the service of the notice, a 30 day notice, and as soon as the tenant is out, immediately getting to work. we would stipulate to a short

timeframe. >> thank you. counsel for the appellant, we would like to hear from you on that. >> unfortunately, i cannot agree to any type of stipulation, but i will concede it to anything the board decides. then we will take our action. if you release notice to this decision and they have to follow through with the 30-day notice, but i cannot stipulate -- then that is fine, but i cannot stipulate to that. >> let me change this just a little bit. perhaps we can look at an expedited time frame from the date that the tenancy is over,

that she leaves. let the construction be completed within three months of the vacation of the move -- unit. >> that would work for me. do you want to make that motion? >> so moved. is that understood, victor? >> and just to clarify, vice- president, is that basic -- on the basis that you would like the pe to vacate the promise -- the premises? >> yes. >> ok, thank you. >> to repeat, we have a motion from the vice-president to

uphold this permit on condition that the construction be completed within three months of the unit being vacated and on the basis that the board would like the permit holder to abate the nlv. president fong: aye. commissioner fung: aye. commissioner hillis: aye. and commissioner hurtado is absent. >> we will move on to item number six, which is the appeal no. 12-050. the subject property is at 1382, 1384, and 1386 mcallister streets.

this is an appeal for construction work done without a permit. this is application number 2,012.1042083. uzziah understand from the inspection department, the department and the appellant have -- as i am understand from the inspection department, the department and the upon have agreed to permit fees. do you want to hear from both start -- both sides? >> if the parties both want to be heard. if there is no need to speak, that is fine tthis is dbi. i'm happy to reduce the penalty to two times, which is the minimum we can go. i spoke to the applicant as well, and he seems happy. >> why did the department decide this? >> i think they are new owners

and they're trying to comply with the violation notice. they're trying to combat -- to clean up the building. i've looked at things that were there previously with a different order that we might have missed. but in this case, we're happy to reduce it. it is probably unfortunate that is statement -- that is even here. if someone had looked at it a little bit more, then maybe we would not be here. maybe we should do that more. but when i just read of the people working in a brief, it seemed to me that was reasonable. >> is the appellant here? would you care to speak to the board? if you do, you need to come to the microphone. >> we agreed with what he had decided. we are new owners, the penalty occurred prior to is taking ownership. we are in the process of

correcting anything wrong with the building. we pulled permits and this was a surprise to us as we went to pull the permits. that is the reason we are here. but we are in agreement. >> ok, thank you. any public comment? seeing none, then commissioners, the matter is submitted. >> i move to reduce the penalty to two times the assessment based on the agreement between the two parties. >> thank you. mr. pachinko, when you are ready. >> we have a motion from president fong to reduce this penalty to 80 times the regular fee on the basis of the agreement between the two parties, dbi and the appellant. -- reduce this penalty to two times the regular fee on the basis of the agreement between the two parties, dbi and the

appellant. the motion passes. >> i think it would be helpful to have commissioner hurtado here for the next several cases. unless someone has the compelling reason to go forward at this moment, i think we would like to take a 20 minute break. are you ok with that? >> i apologize for being late, but i had a work commitment. i came as and as i could. >> we are resuming the meeting of the board of appeals june 13th, 2012. calling item number 7. david kwoff vs the department.

a permit to of all -- to alter a building to the original architecture. including railing and firewall. this is on for a hearing today and we will start with the appellant. you have seven minutes. gregg's ability evening, -- >> good evening, your honorable judges of the board of appeals. >> could you speaking to the microphone? rex oh, sorry. good evening. -- >> oh, sorry. good evening. my name is david. i'm here with my wife to exercise our rights that all

homeowners are entitled to, and to protest the building of a balcony at 360 moraga street. at please come help me place a condition of the balcony to be moved away from our property line, as stated in my brief. this is the last of the privacy we have enjoyed for over 30 years. since the home was built back in 1905, no home should have to suffer like this. the balcony takes up space and takes away from us our living headquarters. you may already know that this is not a new balcony. it was built before this was issued in april of 2012.

mr. jason vermont blamed the fine on me, which he initiated. i felt like i was such a victim. my main concern was the with a balcony was made. it was right -- was the way the balcony was made. it was right next our property line. >> face up, just like you were looking at it. >> this is too close for comfort. as you can see inside my home's living room, from exhibit a that i provided earlier. anyone can stand there and see right through my window without any effort. there are only 6 ft. apart --

their own 8 ft. apart. it does not get only -- any closer. you can get so in detail you can see my skin. i do not wish to be seen so, especially at my main living headquarters. another problem is the height of the balcony. it stands almost 5 ft. above this floor, the family floor. it creates the look of a tiny tower. it is an ugly sight. the light shoots out of the property on 316 moraga street. it has light shining on it. it makes it look like the san francisco court power. and because of that, it blocks my view looking outward to the north of the golden gate bridge.

the lights prevent that from happening. >> i also want to reemphasize the problem that we have it is dark out there. i am full of frustration. i never had a say to this or anything. ed to reoffered. we never had any discussion on it.

please let my wife continue. >> my name is ellen kwok, i am the wife of david. pleasrequest the court of appeao order the abatement of the building permit. to say that balcony must be built 4 feet away from the public line so people stand on the balcony cannot see into our room. as one of the homeowners, i have never been invited to any of the meetings or conversations that was mentioned in the brief. i do not believe david and him ever came on in a verbal agreement on his attention -- intention of building a balcony. the definition of a balcony is a

platform projecting from the wall of a building, a railing along its outer edge with access from a door or window. please look at exhibit b. a picture of the response. this is what it would look like before was built into a balcony. it is not a balcony. what he claims is -- a balcony existed before he built it. no one can stand on that thing. i do not know how to college. my english is not that good. the pictures show how it was before it was expanded into a balcony today. you can look at it. exhibit e from the appellate

brief. this is before it was expanded. i am sorry. thank you. it can see how it was expanded. it was in the size of a desk and it is so close to the berms facing our backyard. a person standing on the backyard can effortlessly look into our room. his intention was to do a dry run repair. eventually it turned into a building. obviously when the inspector came, a balcony was there already.

what our point here is to say is no balcony is [unintelligible] and there is a huge difference between people standing on the street looking into our rooms and people standing near windows. >> your time is up. i have a question. you raised good points. one of the questions i have is, can you address, i know you have time for rebuttal. i would like to hear it in advance. the issue position raised by the permit holder that the only access, there is no flood access. people are -- i do not know what it is made for xm for additional space fleming. in terms of their privacy, it

looks like no one will be walking out there. how would you respond? >> people can access to the balcony. quex like walking over the window? >> yes. >> open the window and go out there. >> ok. thank you. >> one additional question. the permit holder had offered to provide -- president hwang vice president fung: the permit holder offered to put a screen wall. they indicated there was no response to that proposal. is that something desirable for you? no. a screen wall is a wall that people stand on the balcony, it is about that screen wall.