mother did not understand what was going on, she passed away in 2000 and i actually went down to the building and there is not one permit. it is just a frame. and you know, whatever, and whatever was done in the 60s or whatever when it was built. so, another thing was my mother got a which is not on file, a permit on file but not what was done there was a home improvement now back in the day. and probably about 10 years or 8 years or something, and that was paid off by my mom and then the city signed off saying that everything was okay and i don't know if that complaint, something that was done in the 80s or something that was done, you know, in the 90s. but that is where it is at right now and i am just trying to not ignore anybody, but being diligent to stand up for the property and that is my

inheritance. >> okay. i would like to hear from the staff, again. and whether you know, the fact that this building is in probate, and it will be sold, the recommendation for us to act on this at all? >> i don't want to get into too much, but for today, we discovered that the subpoena power or court decision would be to with the property that there was a deed recorded and stating that the owners who is deceased and that somebody else had ownership, and that the

superior court decision was that document was... (inaudible) and that deed was reversed. so, i think that it would be best that we would just move forward cleanly, and on the order of abatement rather than being dragged into the details that don't need to be exposed in public with regard to the whole ownership. so i just do that. >> and am i to understand that there is nobody living in there, so it is *fr an empty building. >> that is my understanding. >> you have a question? >> so, staff, needs to be done, and what is the approximate cost of that? >> it is just a matter of

getting the permit to move removed the construction that was done. >> and that was on the first floor. >> all right. >> and if i could see the value work. and in value, but, my experience will be from the description maybe $5,000 worth of work. and this would be just to remove everything. and put the building back the way it was before it was altered. so, many situations that that would be less than $10,000. and the need is to follow the plan to move on that. that has not been done? >> no permit on record at this point. >> okay. >> commissioner mccarthy. >> thank you.

the person who filed the appeal, does that carry any weight if that person is no longer pursuing the appeal? >> that is kind of what i was alluding to earlier. that, you know, the status of the appellant is questionable and so i dent want to go. >> understood, i don't want to be passing any remarks, and anybody who is going to appeal. that i will leave it at that. >> but there is no representation of the appellant here, right? >> not of the owners of the property. >> okay, thank you. >> so, commissioner mccarthy, you seem to be holding some permits and so the question is that the appellants are not have not filed the permits? and they have filed those? >> no, they are not filed? >> they are not filed.

>> okay. >> hang on. >> go ahead. >> sir. >> did you want to ask something? >> this is kind of... and the residents and have been residents at the estate since 73, i have been and that is where i live, my sister and i. i pay the taxes there and i have been paying the taxes there i just cleared it up and at the beginning of the month. and i forgot to state when i went down to get these done, like i said i had a contractor come, and i forgot to present these and they were supposed to be drawings of an existing, the lady and she wanted to have the existing, design, and then, do

the i guess the proposed design and that which we needed the architect and she said that the plans do not have to be based on the produced for the habitat and that is why we got this and like i said, i am kind of not new to this and to take care of all of this. and should the property and i am, and i am an heir the first born of my mother and so i am interested party in the matter. and which, in fact, i paid the taxes which i why i filed the appeal. and the work, and i think that it was estimated about roughly, estimated $4,000 and that is why i think that there are two different estimates that are there and if you want to see drawings and maybe that is, you can get a better idea of the charge of what it takes. and like i said, i think that on there, it says, dollar, on

one and then 400 on the other. >> and so it is like, i mean i don't come up with that but then again, i don't know what the basis is if they are going to if we present it to that, and how does that work? that you guys come in and i am not certain. >> excuse me sir. >> and also, to know that the presence in the probate will be the jurisdiction of the courts and the courts have jurisdiction of this matter as opposed to what is the outside sources, and because it is in the probate right now. >> go ahead. >> sxim confused, i am confused, you see, the city attorney, could you help me understand the probate issues and what the impact upon us? and upon whether we oppose the abatement and assess the charges. and my understanding and i don't have everything that is being referred to in front of me is that there is a dispute as to owns this and that is my

understanding and the probate court is probably sorting that out, but that won't, and that does not mean that you can't up hold the order of abatement against the owner of record and if later, determine that whoever is listed as the owner of record that has to change and then the order of abatement is against the property. >> okay. >> so the question to the staff is there any indication, what are the amount of charges that are before the assessment costs of right now and that might be? commissioners, just, i looked at the form eight but that the pink form and the building permits, and one, is incomplete and the second one looks like the second one on the fifth floor, and there is no receipt which would indicate that he has not paid for either permit.

and so, obviously he does not have a merit. no permit and so the costs, that we know, how long and how much. okay. >> the initial fee of sending it at this time is $1,224.25. >> and go ahead. >> the chair? >> and john, you mentioned just removal would satisfy. >> yes. >> i think that... >> with the permit. >> and so that would kind of dramatically change that dollar amount, so the removal will satisfy it. >> and we don't have to do any drawings and we don't have to do anything like that,; is that correct?? >> deputies? >> well, the drawings, for and we are, and of the partitions or the walls and you will have to show us a existing and a proposed and they don't have to be very fancy, and with a

single family drawing and there does not have to be a design professional. >> so what he had to do there, would that suffice? >> there was one permit there for 400. and if, indeed there is only two walls to remove, and yes, that will suffice, i do believe, and the notice of violation talk about three rooms to help you out, i think that what happened, is prior to getting the notice of violation is that they have a sun room and under this, the sun room, that it takes and so many put it in to make a storage room that is what we are really talking about, we are not talking about ha bitable space. if that was removed, with a permit, and you did not have to do any more work, and you did not have to you know, do any structural or... >> and or is she satisfied. >> and we still have one outstanding issue, right? >> yes, and if they did all of that with the permit, and they

got the permit signed off and providing to us but regardless of whether they do that or not, we will see that the end is upheld because then we will be to receive that initial fee to cover the costs, and involved with the indicates it. >> for clarifying that. i just want to note that commissioner lee has joined us. >> so that will dramatically craoe duce the burden to the owner here. if he was to take that, just to remove it. and... >> yeah, like if they want to legalize. >> yeah. >> part of the, you know, the whole new space underneath that, and we are talking about, and maybe, with the remove it and would the permit that would be pass it on us, and yeah. >> one of the other questions is that through the chair, is it, he permitted to do that

with things in the probate right now? >> and no. i don't think so, but, whoever the owner of the lord is, has to come in and get the permit is my understanding and again, i don't have any of those probate papers in front of me but my understanding based on the staff report is that there is a dispute for the owner and that the probate court is sorting that out and he can't do that right now. >> and that is my understanding, and that is the civil matter and the probate is pretty much the thing that gets taken care of in the civil matter, it is a civil matter that is protesting our cousins and the diseased 50 percent ownership. and so that is where it is at. and we understand. >> okay. >> and for the record, too, i would like since this is already here, i would have a non-profit and i brought in,

under served youth into our basement to then, after the school programs and so it is my intention to actually get that down stairs and legalized to be able to accommodate, the people that come in and being handicapped or not. and so, initially i do want to get that whole thing proposed and while, we are here and addressing the matter and that is why i am also asking for more time and that is why i was doing the appeal and i paid the receipt. and but it never showed a day or a time that this would come up. i just happen to get back in town and found that. >> thank you for that. >> so i would like to ask the staff again, story. so we are sort of in a quaundry here, if we up hold, the order of appeal, then, it is our clock ticking and then that, he can't actually do anything, and the things that we are asking,

henry, we really can't and forfeit, and you know until the probate, matter gets resolved according to joana. >> and just to give you a clarification, the original notice of violation believe it or not was in 1997. >> right. but she is deceased. >> with that as the backdrop. >> yes. >> and are we going to deliver, and coming before you with the forced notice of violation from that date. i guess that i am just asking, in terms of the out come that we want. you know, having a hard time seeing a clear path to something that is desirable for us due to the circumstances. >> right. >> and right now, the ownership until it is all cleared up. the status now is there are deeds in place, and one family member, 50 percent and another

family member 50 percent, and those individuals are deceased and two parties involved and they are financial disputes and i will say that if the order of abasement is upheld and the fees are clarified as being what they are, there is a final decision, and it will encourage the representatives from the board to work together, and if the owner is not, and then the court, how are they going to decide how to divide the responsibility. it will be clarify if the order is issue and you are welcome to get the work done, but if the

order is. >> i would like to move that there is no dispute about the finding of the staff that these violations occurred and there is no dispute, and so i would like to up hold the order of abatement and let the property owner or owners whoever they may be give them 60 days to pull the proper permit and proceed on the work. >> i second. >> and obviously, that we

understand that this is going to drag out long they are than 30 days and it is one of these things that you come across, and we have to unfortunately, you know, make a decision on it and i do concur with the staff on this 97 and we talk a lot about trying to do the right thing and clear up all of these and so i would second that as well. >> on the motion, if we give 30 days, and gives us 30 days to put the permits in place and to move things along as well as court to make the move is that what 30 days give us or him? >> i think what you are, i think what commissioner's motion is, to up hold the order of abatement and allow the 30 days to complete the work. we can't have... i have no way to judge how long it is going to take. and any disputes about

ownership to get resolved. >> whether that is in the appropriate amount of time i don't have any idea. >> just on the question. >> shall we take a vote? >> yes. >> we have 30 days to complete the work or 30 days to apply for the permit? >> i think that willing to modify it to make it clear that it is 30 days to pull the permit. and have a paid permit. and to obtain a permit. and then, you know, they can work with the staff where this is actually a contractor or people involved. to work with the staff. >> is that acceptable? commissioner mccarthy? >> yeah. and you know, to kind of guide the person in question here, that you know, just do the basic removal, to kind of type and you don't get beyond that and because, and i still believe that 30 days and this is probably not going to be

enough time. and you know. and but, do the bare minimum to... >> and taking the figures right there. >> and you need to come down. >> and let them walk you through the fifth floor. >> yeah. >> okay, do you want to... >> i recommend not leaving the date that they are required to complete the work open-ended, i think that is a problem. so 30 days to pull the permit and then what period of time in order to complete the work? >> and then the permit state how long they have to complete the work? >> he would have at least a year to complete the work that is the lowest time that the least amount of time that we give, so if it is a one dollar permit you have one year to complete the work. >> we don't have to put that in the motion? madam counselor? >> i would recommend that you include in your motion to up hold the order of abasement

that they pull the permit within 30 days and then there be an end period for the work and it sounds like a year is something that would be workable. based on my understanding of how the process works and i think that will be reasonable. >> does that mean that he has to restate the motion? >> yeah. >> okay. i will restate the motion and so they will pull the permit and pay the fees within 30 days, and they will have a year to complete the work. >> commissioner mccarthy? >> inspector, just because obviously we vul aa stake in getting the right thing done here, are you okay with this? >> that is what i was waiting to hear the completing, a year, and that is enough. and because the clock stops somewhere that sounds good. >> hey. >> and i have a motion and a second, is there any public comment on the motion? >> okay. seeing none, we will do a roll call vote.

vice president melgar. >> aye. >> commissioner lee. >> yes. >> commissioner mar. >> yes. >> commissioner mccarthy. >> yes. >> commissioner mccray. >> yes. >> and the motion carries unanimously. >> on to item e, continued appeal, case number 6781:2278-42nd avenue, owner of record, maxine pauson 2278-42nd avenue, and action requested by the appellant, the modification of the order of abatement to allow the additional time to complete the work. >> this particular single family dwelling i want to put in context of why we are here today. in february of last year, i received a complaint from a adjacent property owner, to,

2278-42nd avenue. and so the individual, the subject property here is on 42nd avenue. and the concern came to me from property owners at the require of the subject property on 41st avenue. and the complaint at that particular time was that there was a tree in the yard of the subject property that was imminently ready to fall down and cause, i am nant hazard for the adjacent properties at that time. we got jpw involved in this and they did an emergency order and took that down because the property owner was non-responsive. now, we then, in march of last year, and want the litigation committee and referred this case to our recommended that the case be referred to the city attorney because we had a notice of violation, previously from 2010, sighting from the exterior inspections that the property was continuing to be

run down and we were getting calls from adjacent property owners and i am going to show you the picture of the front of the building. this was taken in august of 2002, and not much has changed, and i want you to know that there is a outline between the subject property and the properties on either side of it. so when we referred the case to the city attorney, in march of last year, thank you, we had a subsequent inspection that the property owner facilitated and then, in july or august, and both photos of what you saw in the anterior of the subject property, at 2278, 42nd avenue are in your package and as you can see, the property has issues, and i am just going to put some of these up there for you, and these are some of the interior rooms of the property.

>> the light does not work. >> better. >> here you can see that we have issues with weather proofing and molding and mildew and etc. so we basically, the case, we were, and another notice of violation as a result of this inspection. and that notice of violation has items that are outstanding as well. and the property owners have not been responsive. and this is continued and we continued to get complaints from adjacent property owners, given the state of the property. and you also have in your package, and we do welcome the assistance of mr. free man who is assisting the property owner and wrote a letter to us back in june of this year saying, we would like some time to try and work with some issues of the property owner to get these items fix and could we have

until august or september to do that and we are now in november and we have asked to get back into the property which not yet has occurred. but our concern is that the timetable that the property owner has does not seem to be conducive to what the adjacent property owners are having to deal with, and also, the it is over $2,000 for our time and i cannot tell you that at this point, what the city and attorney fees are and a lawsuit has not been filed and we will hope that mr. free man can help us with this and i do want to say that through, and on our part he did not get a copy of the staff report until a few minutes ago and so he has not had a chance to see that, but

he was noticed of this particular hearing, and i think that he is in general, familiar with the issues because i know that the staff has had some conversations with him about that. and so with that, we are looking for some guidance to see, basically an action plan. and so if the commission wants to come back and say let's give her more time, and thank you. >> thank you, rose mary. >> could we hear from the appellant, please? >> good morning, to everyone. >> good morning, scott, on behalf of the appellant. and i would hope here that we all share the same goals of getting this property fixed up on a timetable, that we can all work with. i personally have been involved with this issue since april of last year and i wish that these

issues have been resolved by now, there are physical and financial impediments that prevent that from occurring, i have since april offered to participate and assist and be at meetings and talk to whoever might choose to call me and talk to me about this, and i have repeatedly felt as though, intentionally or not, i have been kept out of the loop here, and i understand that there are budgetary concerns from the department's behalf but when i don't get a department of the staff report, and i have asked for a copy of this months ago and i am returning phone calls to people that clearly understand that i am involved but it makes it difficult for me to try to help you and the home owner get to where everybody would like to be. and we have never denied access to this property, and i think that it is noted in this staff report that i did get a chance to review this morning. and that i did call back and i

offered to set up the inspection, and as i think that you are probably aware that there is a parallel set of issues involved in the dpw and the dph. and so the home owner's inspection that it occurs dispieed the purpose and that was not the case and willing to provide the inspection and i don't think that the conditions inside of the property have changed much although i do think that they look better on the outside of the property and that is where she has been focusing her efforts because that is where the neighbors are complainting, and we think that the property does not look as nice as ours and when those complaints come in she focuses her efforts on that but she is limited. so i am open to suggestion and open to assisting and you know, i am not being paid for my efforts in this matter, and i am doing this probono because i believe in this cause and i believe that is an issue that should be corrected if we can get a time able that everybody

can live with and we can all continue the dialogue towards making sure that that happened. and so, now i am open to whatever suggestions that the panel has and in that regard and willing to participate however i can and assessing the home owner for the continued costs, and it is not going to get us to a place where this building gets fixed up but that is just going to effectively penalize her for not being able to afford these improvements that need to be paid through a property. and so, i would like to think that they are human element that is a component of this case and we can deal with that and in a manner that respects, these issues and respects the concerns that you have, and again, i am open to assist and cooperating and meeting with whoever might be willing to meet with us to help us come up with that action plan that we can all live with.

>> has your client allowed to be in contact with an organization called rebuilding together? >> it has. >> then are they helping her? >> what? i would have to refer to her on that, but my understanding of her talks with rebuilding together, was that they did not have availability to assist her. and that is mostly the problem that i have run into in trying to get her assistance that either she does not qualify for it, for some reason or another. and generally based on her age, or, that the funding is no longer there. >> and how about the mayor's office of housing? >> also been in contact with them, and the discussions that i had with, i don't know everybody he name. mark. >> yes. >> and led me to believe that they were going to be able to assist for a certain aspect of the periods and not to include but i understand to be the principals at this point and being thof