an estimated time of it, and you know, somebody could review it and see how complicated it is and you know, put it in you will have it in two weeks or you will have it in four weeks, you know? >> and i think that is really, what i understand the development community is asked for. not even expediting but really knowing, which is really important for their scheduling. >> i am not hearing too many comments about something dragging out. >> it is pretty efficient, i guess, the larger projects i can see that they can be difficult if you put them into the plan check and a lot of stuff kind of comes out for the unforeseen, the smaller projects seem to be efficient and a lot of people get the permits out in a month. >> in dbi, not planning. >> and yeah, the dbi and i am huky to have been to help me to track every week, to give them

notice, or even to start this job and so forth, by looking in the backlog. >> yeah. >> indeed, in the pac meeting, i called the planning, and like you mentioned two weeks, but they never come back to me, when can they stop? >> yeah. >> and they promised two weeks, but never this week. >> and i don't, i might be a little bit off topic but it is relevant to time, have we ever got a conclusion with the last conversation that we had where editing that must be and it has a change and it has to go back to planning if there was a revision? where did we leave off there? >> yeah, i asked, them, okay, for example, in the small jobs, a lot of contractor or designer that they use in the old site permit and then package together with no changes and they should not go back to planning and some of the big jobs, of course, we need to go back to them but say still we don't apply what to do and they

go back to talk with john only. >> so we don't have it from them, if they are reviewing instead of the plans and it has not changed and we know that and they have not said that it is going to take a week to get back to you. >> still. >> and where is that going to end up? is that going to be revisited or coming back to us with that? >> yeah. he promised that it will come back, but, they did not show up last, and you know, nothing else to ask. >> okay. i can talk to john again. >> look forward to hearing something in january on that. >> okay. >> might i suggest that we think about having a joint commission meeting at some point to address these particular issues involved with our permitting system? >> have we ever done one of them? >> yes, we did a couple of them, several years ago and it was really helpful, because, you know, often times, the commissioners don't know the details and if there is direction from that level it

might help. >> usually, it takes a long time to set up. so i remember, and i would really like to do it if the other commissioners could find it helpful. >> would you float the idea if they would be interested in having a joint meeting. >> you can talk to the president of the commission. >> should i... >> yeah. >> why don't we do that. i will and i will report back in january. >> perfect. >> and if i get an answer. >> okay. >> item 4 e. update on code enforcement. >> it should come up. >> good morning, commissioners.

>> consultants, >> thank you, very much, i appreciate that. >> bid, building inspection performance measures for the last month, for inspections performed, there is 4,060 inspections. and inspections performed in 48 hours of the time request was 99 percent. there was only 33 inspections performed after the 48 hours request, i would like to get it to my staff for the hard work for that, that is a great response to have it, a 99 percent response in the time frame that is allowed. complaints received, there was 263, complaints, and 155 were response in 24 hours, 57, were in response within 72 hours. complaints response every 72 hours for 51. and the complaints no response is zero. so that means that there was 100 percent response in

complaints, 59 percent response in the first 24 hours, so i want to commend my staff for that, too. to be very watchful at this point. >> complaints received and abaited in the same period is 111. complaints referred to the code enforcement division were 12. the first notice of violations were 60. complaints with the second notice were one. and the complaints received and abaited without notices of violations were 107 and no violations were 166 f, and abaited complaints within these were 26. he is not present to record the housing, and give the housing inspection performed for the last month, for the housing

inspections, there were 742 complaints, or i am sorry, for the housing inspection there were 742 inspections performed for the complaints received there were 426, for the complaint response within 24 to 72 hours were 394, complaints and notice of violations issued were 131, abaited complaints and notice of violations were 385. and number of cases sent to the director's hearing was 29. i will have john inspection talk on the code enforcement. >> and for code enforcement, and we took 62 building and electricity and plumbing cases to the director's hearing of those 18 of abasement issues, and 7 were held under advisement. and for the month, we abaited a

total of 159 cases that concludes our report, thanks. >> okay, thank you. >> thank you, commissioners. >> thank you, tom. >> is there any public comment on item 4, the director's report for athrough e? >> >> i would like the commissioner walker and i also forgot to mention the condolences of the passing of your dad. >> thank you. >> as going to tom who said earlier the issue is with planning these days about trying to get permits approved quickly particularly when it comes to the side permit where there are no changes to the outside of the property, once the site permit approved there is not going to be any chances dbi should be able to sign-off on it, on the code at that time and the representative from planning was going to get back to us about allowing dbi to

approve those, and which they should be and so we have not heard any more about it there is no doubt though, that commissioner martha planning sort of a stumbling block for a lot of folks when it comes to complying for the notice of violation and you have to go to the hearing for a variance or something like that. and you can't get a response for them and what else i had one recently where we had a response and i will get right on it and i will have it by friday and that was last week and i have for the heard a word sense, and so i have nothing to do about that and i am not complaining about planning, and they have a difficult job they really do because they have to be watching the backs of what the neighbors are going to say about what is happening tlout and it is totally understandable but when something is in the process, they should get on with it if they can't, at least they will let you know where they are at, so any way that is my two cents, thank you. >> any further public comment?

>> okay, seeing none, item 5. commissioner's questions and matters. 5 a, inquiry to staff, at this time, the commissioners may make inquiries to the staff regarding various documents, policies, practice and procedures which are of interest to the commission. >> should i give you the update? >> if the commissioner walker, weigh in and take it from there and then, i am just presume that we are talking about the same? >> yeah. >> commissioner walker. >> many of us were kind of shocked about the collapse of a building, i don't have the exact address, but... >> 125. >> 125 crown terrace. >> and yeah, and so i emailed the director and asked for an update to the commission. this project has been before us

as an informational update a couple of times because of the connection to prior commissioners and the interest of the commission to make sure that we are doing all possible to enforce our roles and the fact that this building collapsed is really, really disturbing, to me, i am sure to the other commissioners and probably to everyone at dbi whose job it is to insure that it does not happen. and so, i really am requesting that we take this very seriously, fortunately there was no injury but there could easily have been and i just don't understand, i totally don't understand how this happened. so, what you know now and then, what our plans are for figuring out how this occurred. >> tom, director.

for this incident, nobody wants to have this happen. when it comes to me i was surprised and shocked. okay? and then, yes, first of all, this job is reviewed by subject to rebuke by the section code chapter one, because in this area because of the hill slide. and also, is when i hear the news, and then right away, yes, i went in there, and number one concern, is make sure that the safety, you know, to protect the public and also the adjacent properties, yes, we issued an emergency shoring to hold up the structure. to secure it, no further in a movement there. and then they already come to pick the work yesterday. and then right now, i have been

treat this job and that is similar to every other job and we want to be transparent and we want to be fair. first of all, number one, i want them to come up with a report, and say what happened, what is the cause? what is the action from here on? step by step to issue it? >> besides that, i want to have an independent review by the structural committee before my team is do be dealed with and we have a section engineer to make sure that we do it right. make sure from now on, we do everything according to the code. and also, it is the inspection part, i want to make sure that they will assign, and that this inspector would... or to look through the jobs and when i went to the site yesterday and

i find out the construction, and i feel the construction costs need to be studied a little bit further and you asked my deputy, with the tsd to revisit the cost to make sure that we charge it right to, you know, similar to everybody, because, maybe compare other situations because this is a means, and it is a unique job and it is not usually like if you are building a building like that because it is a cup area and, that is what i want to do, and then, besides to review the section of review, i would like to have my principal engineer, tom to work on it and parallel with all of those peer review and he conducts the peer review on those jobs before. and also, you know, i would like to conduct with the city attorney, and every step and we

do it right, and transparent, and i want to be check everybody that the same and it does not matter now, the commissioner and whoever it is, and we will be fair, and everybody opened to see, what is going on there. and that is so i can see and say, and we will give you next time more details. and it is an incident that i don't want to occur but we need to find out what is going on, you know. there is something i cannot tell right now. i visit there, but i cannot go into the underneath the building, because i also worry about my safety too. >> of course. >> thank you, director for the update. >> i wanted to weigh in on this too, first of all i did visit the site there yesterday morning when i got the news of it. and obviously i am just thankful that nobody got hurt and it is amazing. and i think that the paper even

pointed that out today. and so, we as a city, we can be very grateful that we are not dealing with a complete disaster out there with the people hurt and killed if it had gone down during regular work hours, not to mention if it had gone in the neighborhood and damaged other homes. >> and with regard to the media coverage, i... we have to be very cognoscente of the fact that the general public are taking this very seriously, i have not seen so much media coverage on this in one day for a long time and there is a reason for that and we as a commission here and commissioners we have worked very, very hard to reinforce to the staff, and the rank and file and also to the public that everything is done with the utmost integrity and responsibility when we do the plan checks and obviously director, i kind of want to do a little, kind of to talk to what you have said but i want

to be sure that we are all on the same page here and we will meet next month for the meeting and if we have to have a special meeting on this and i am willing to do this. and i would like to see obviously a very detailed report. and i would also like to see the inspections. and i also believe that they can come up and ask me. and there are a few corrections on the inspection side, and i aligned there yesterday and i want to talk to the director mention something about the permit and i want to see where we are at on the cost on the permit. >> and as far as the inspections, yeah. >> the majority of the inspections, and the building itself, and the five inspections out there. and we will have the detailed report from the inspecters who

inspected that district inspect whore inspected that. >> also we have the special inspections for the reports and that will be one of the things that is important to me to see on that and another correction notice written for regarding to the cost. >> yes, there was another correction. >> yeah. >> and ed can tell you about that if you like, that is one of stat staff and they looked at the plans, and they recomputed it and came up with another additional amount. >> this went through a special plan review, right? >> so we know that they did go through with, you know, structural committee and technical engineer and also, geologist, and structural engineer and also a shoring engineer and architect. >> so this is established for

those special type of sites that special attention down here. >> yes. >> it does not go through the normal plan check and it is a special plan review. >> yeah. >> okay. >> and so is this the special plan review and does that go through the normal channel or is that, >> no, you go through the channel, you know, it is still under the plan review, but this job is handled by the principle engineer, tom, for structural peer review on that, what they call that and on the whole and this particular site, because he is one, and after, and they put that in including in the pit area. >> the dedicated project, and it is not normal, submital over the counter. >> no. >> so it does not go through the normal channel, this went through a special plan check flt >> that is correct. >> so i would be interested to hear from the plan checker who

plan checked this as well. on the shoring aspect of this. >> also... >> whoever that was i would be interested in hearing. >> okay. and how to come up with the detail on that. and maybe, there is a group of people that are inspected the structural shoring of that. the whole package. >> okay, it is a difficult town to build and we have to be able to stand behind the plan checks and whatever permit was issued there and you had mentioned a cost, could you elaborate on that? >> the cost when i went there because of the difficult, it was not a usual one and they are maintaining more how to build it, and the construction may not be usual when for, you

know, just like the tight to calculate. and i want them to revice sxit that is why i told you, that i may ask him, and asks for he and also tsd to work closely with the site, and we var and then compare the other jobs, similar to see. and you know, >> yeah, because in our code we say that we rarely calculator compare to the actual cost, that is what the actual cost is how to do. and the owner will not give you the contract, sometimes, you have need to compare, that is why it is opened, and you know, more times fair and we will study a little bit more. but if i go on-line, i see that there was some correction, notice written for the cost,; is that correct?? >> yes. >> what is that amount? >> what is the amount that we are dealing with here? >> of the correction that we go, or they came up with? the technical services or the people that did the marshal swift, recalculated the whole and they came up with another

210,000. >> what was the original permit dollar amount. >> the original permit was, 300,000, and then there was some other permits that were taken, that was filed and they paid fees on, that were... i am sorry, the original permits, i don't have the inspection sheet in front of me, i don't know if they are going to suspend it but they did not use those and so the original permit that they used and for the permit fees that were filed on those were never enacted for those permits. and the costs involved there. >> so what you are saying is the amount on the original permits was half of what it should have been? >> i am trying to guess, and here is what i, and the big thing that the commission has been focused on is having a fair, and it is a fair ak quitable for everybody on

permit fees, when i go in the system i see that there is an adjustment of the cost and i am curious, why is that at this stage after the houses come down off the hill and we are looking at a cost. >> and the cost before a house came down a hill. >> maybe a week ago or two weeks ago. and there was no the evaluation. and that was on the computer, and i see, and i am trying to get the head on and a complaint that came into the department and rerelooked at the cost and brought it down and reeval you. and that is the number that they asked to increase the total of the job >> that number was in total and that was the number that we received for the additional amount and there were other fees that were required. and i am not sure of the fees and there were fees that were paid at the filing that was never, credited for that job

there. >> and so, let me just simplify it this way if i was taking that house and i got ten other houses just like this that were being built, would the cost of those fees be the same as this one. >> that was looked at at the marshal swift, it was used on all of the homes. >> the corrected amount is the one that would be used but the original amount was lower than the original amount of the fee was too low. >> it would be interested to see if you could give me five houses, for example, the same houses that the permit was issued for the same cost of construction and i will be interested in seeing that and the marshal swift number and you have not seen what is that number to me and i am asking what is the actual construction cost is now. and the actual construction cost of per the marshal, was $620,000. as the figure that they came up. and we went back and relooked

at the figure there and they are comfortable with the figure. and the original amount that was issued was $300,000. >> and we came up with the 300,000 equation with the marshal swift formula. >> and now we are coming up with the same form law and it is doubled >> i did not do the original plan review and i am not sure how it came up with the original plan number and so you see this is the problem that i am having, dan and this is where i, and where the fairness here and the fair and equitable for everybody who applies for permit has to be the same. i am trying to get high head around why this permit was so, low, and another house thatwise built the same and would have $600,000 in construction costs or more. and i am not sure of the size of the house and i am not sure that the $600,000, was correct. >> and i am interesting in looking at that. >> and so i am really concerned, about the fact that

a permit was issued with such a low cost for such a big job. >> and john from the city attorney's office and it is the inquiries to staff and so maybe i can suggest, that you request that the staff come back at the next month's meeting and report on how the report for the evaluation for different kinds of projects >> and i can tell. >> and i am trying to pult it on the next report and which is going to include how we are going to save this house. one report that i am hearing is that the emergency demo will be performed and another one working on trying to salvage and save the house and the house came down the hill here and i am really as a builder and developer somebody has been around this and i am curious as to how you are going to save

this and who is doing that analysis, as far as... >> commissioner, first of all, like i mentioned, i want them to come up with the report and what is the cost, and what is the next action they need to do and then we will be in parallel and peer review by our committee from the peer reviewer immediate reviewed and also our staff and review it also. and for this, case, i cannot just go in and see the emergency, and they have the life safety concerned and by looking at that site, you know, right now is not you know, further... and i say to have the emergency shoring and maybe they will have the emergency and they can come up with the report and there is no choice and i don't want for myself to say that there is an emergency, until, you know, for example,

we have, it is a big storm coming in, and it is rolling down the hill, then i need to do that. like any fire when i saw it, and then i will create the demo. >> and then we will wrap it up. >> commissioner mar? >> yeah, i think that it is important, that the report back, and we will have an agenda item and a special meeting includes all of our questions and that is what we are trying to do is define what our concerns are with what we know to the question of where do we go, from here, i have said this before, when we deal with this exact situation where there has been a demolition permit applied for and refused by the building department and then the planning department is left to a, deter ate or treated carelessly, which creates a situation where they then asked for an emergency demolition,

which then opens up where the thing that was not granted by planning. and so it looks to be like a sideways, around, and a refusal of demolition. and so, going forward, i would like to have a clear definition of what the choices are, i am not okay with just, you know, tear it down and you can do whatever you want. there has to be something, and we can't let this happen and i am going to use this as an example, going forward so people do not think that they can get away with this assuming that i am not saying that it happened. but i want to be really clear, and these kind of situations have happened, while i have been a commissioner, and we need to do what we can to stop it. >> commissioner mar? >> so, i know, this is question of for the staff topic, but i

want to thank president mccarthy for focusing in on the questions and for those of us who are not even involved in the construction business, there is a lot of questions, and the tough thing is that i didn't even know about the article but this came up on the web yesterday and when i walked into a motorcycle shop of all places yesterday, in the south of market, the owner of that shop said hey did you hear about this, because you knew that i was on the commission and so this is why, we have to deal with it. and as president mccarthy and really address it, because, this makes the not only our department our commissioner look bad it makes the city look bad. so, i think that we really have to kind of make sure that this went through the right process. you know? that there was a lot of inspections done that people looked at the plans, and whether it was us or planning which is just the other

department and i think that the other department that is a little bit responsible again, and you know, did they treat this owner, this is a constant question for us, did they treat this owner the same way they would have treated any other owner? >> in the same circumstance? with the same plans? with the same buildings? and that is really what we wants to get at. >> commissioner melgar? >> thank you, commissioner. >> everything that you guys have said is right on and i think that we, will, get on top of it, i think that this is a really good, staff and really a good commission and i would like to address, something a little different which is our pr. and i think that so, after this article, came out yesterday, it became the most shared article on facebook and twitter, and i don't know if anyone is monitoring that. i was, you know, that is really,