out, our clients in the property owner mr. clammer has had the tenants personal property claim pack removed pursuant to the analytical and the recommendations of the restoration of the management company which was one of the requests that the board put forth they last hearing, in addition to the substantial progress that was noted on the two pages in our supplemental, and our march 12th supplemental report that was provided to the board we have had the further progress at the property, including at this time, all plumbing repairs of the property have been completed, and any, and all major window repairs have been completed. and we are in the progress of

scheduling a painter to begin preparation to perform painting and related tasks at the property. the sandblasting of the radiators is complete, and the repair of the electrical issues are the majority of the repairs of the electrical issues are complete and i think that the inspector was out at the property recently and had some minor follow ups that we needed to complete before he signed off for the electrical repairs. and that is ongoing at this point. and i also believe that our first inspector was at the site this morning and witnessed the progress that has been made since the last appeals hearing. >> and so, just, to summarize,

in addition to all of the... sorry about that. in addition to all of the progress that was stated in our march 12th, 2014 supplemental report to the board, our client and the property owners have made substantial progress in dealing with the issues that have been cited in the notice of violation, and in the order of the abatement, and we continue to address the remaining issues, which there are not very many. and hope that all of the repairs are completed and approved by the building inspection department, and in

the short time. and so at this time, i am going to let him come up and give you kind of a follow up to that summary. at this time. >> thank you, good morning, ladies and gentlemen, and the board, and my name is brian and i am with the other council for adam who owns this specific unit number 7, where the majority of the repairs that were in the notices of violation are contained and in attendance today is another one of the co-owners since i mentioned last time and this building is owned in common and so at the outset that was one of the reasons that makes this kind of a difficult puzzle to fit together because of all of the different moving parts, the presence of the lawsuit and everything. but, since, the last hearing, as they said, we gained position as of february 25th. and permits were issued on march third and march 6th to

allow the additional repairs to go forward and there has been substantial completing of the repairs and there has been an inspection that would conclude the portion earlier and from what i have been informed, all of the work that was done, was approved, there was no problem with the work completed. but new items were identified by the inspector and he said that let's get all of these things done before we sign-off on the repairs. and the plumbing, major plumbing repairs have been completed, and we have install the appliances before there is a sign-off, but the work that has been done has already been inspected to the satisfaction of the city. and i do want to correct, a small misstatement that my co-council made and inspector had been asked to come out and check on the progress and was not able to get access yesterday, and he did not go there this morning and in fact, the head contractor came and he met with him this morning at his office at 8:00 a.m. and he showed them a series of photographs to show them the progress of the work and it was

unfortunate that he would be able to provide the board with a report before this hearing but he did, and the contractor did follow up with him to show that we are very eager to show the city and the compliance with the notices of violation, and finally, previously, there had been a hold up because of the notice of violation because of the department of public health and what has happened with that is that the cleaning has taken place and the cleaning of the personal property has been done and has been removed off sight and the final close out of that notice, mr. wall has agreed to hold off so that all of the repairs can be completed and it would not make sense to kind of clear this the levels of this and all of this construction that is going to take place, which would raise the concerns for the tenants. and so, he is satisfied with the protocol that has been put in place and that unit sealed off from the rest of the building and when all of the repairs are done we should get the final sign-off from the department of public health. and i would hope to give you a date certain that i can say that everything is going to be

done by such and such a date and i can't do that because there is scheduling with the painter and that is one of the requirements to even be repainted and i can't say with confidence that we expect these repairs to be done within the next two weeks and i think that based on the progress that you have seen in the last three weeks since we have gained possession, and there is a room for that optimism and i think that within 30 days, everything including the painting will have been completed. thank you. >> thank you. >> the department, have anything else that they want to add? >> the work that is required by the permit, and they just need to get the sign-off on those and it is those inspecters that they have have to interact with respect to that and showing us photos of things that require the certain permits is helpful but it is not what we are going to be able to need, and to be

able to get those sign-offs and once we have those and then we will be moving much more quickly towards the final resolution of this. and i think that we should also then, perhaps hear from the occupants, too. but be that as it may. >> that is all that i have at this point. >> do you anticipate a two-week period would be sufficient to based on what he, and based on what was on our issues, based on what he... indicated. >> it sounds like they are very close and perhaps, i need to ask them if they can get everything done. >> i think that would be reasonable if what you are asking is would that be reasonable from our standpoint yes, and although we really did take a position that this did need to get done at the last meeting but it sounds like they have made the substantial progress since they have been able to get in and do the work if they could get it done in two weeks and you wanted to continue the order of abatement to do that, i would not have a problem with that and we will have to though, look at what the assessment of the costs are

because that is not linked to the order or a hearing. and definitely look at that, with respect to their getting in and you know, the activity that is going on. >> got it. >> commissioner mar? >> oh,, i am sorry, i had another question. so that was going to be my question, is in terms of the department recommendation, what is your kind of tentative assessment of cost. >> do you have that currently with the current assessment of cost was to the date on this, do you recall? >> can you aapproximate where we are? >> was it approximately 4500. >> and we can, definitely take a look at that, but as you can see there has been a lot of time and effort trying to get to this resolved. >> thank you. >> thank you. >> does the appellant want to

add anything or refute anything? do you have another choice? either option or the time to speak, rebuttal. >> but that would be public comment. >> yeah, the appellant has a chance to do a rebuttal if he would like. >> very briefly, i am not going to take all of the time just because the offered it to me, but if you could address the time frame. >> yes, thank you, sir. >> that is what i wanted to do, and i think that as i said, 30 days, and i think that the work could be completed within two weeks but there is also the process of scheduling inspectors and i would not, try to speak on behave of anybody's schedule when i know that everybody is busy but i think that is realistic but i think that in 30 days, we could get the sign-offs that the staff representative was referring to. >> thank you. >> thank you. >> the time from the public comment? >> hi.

>> if you remember me from last time, my name is dr. amy hower and my husband, and i are the tenants in the property. and let me first start by saying, that everything that they claim to have been done, so far, is not. but i think that the most important thing at this meeting is that this was supposed to be last month, and it was supposed to be, they are appealing an order of abatement that was issued to them by the dbi on december 5th of last year. and they are saying that they don't deserve that issuance, on december 5th of last year. they are saying that they want this wiped clean that they should have nothing on the record and no penalty

whatsoever for completely ignoring the city violations, for a year, for over a year. and at this point, and i think that your decision is whether or not to up hold the order of abatement, whether they deserve to have this order of abatement issued to them and they in my opinion, they do. and i have made a time line, for you guys. perhaps, this will help so that oh,, the whole thing does not fit at once. let's see. so december first, not last year, but two years ago, in 2012, when we reported this major leak, four months later, is when we asked him to take responsibility because he had lied about trying to make any attempts. and he refused so in april, is when the first notice of violation was issued from the

dbi. from april and so in may we had to evacuate our house and home and we have not had access to our house or home or any of our personal property since may of last year. from april to the first directary hearing on october 24 of last year and that was 7 months they did absolutely nothing. not one single thing to repair any of these problems from the department of health or the dbi, not one thing. and then in november, as was mentioned before, we finally had got a lawyer and we were bringing a legal issue because they made a big deal over us preventing them over this, and so just i am pointing this out again and this did not happen until eight months. and on december 5th is when the second dbi hearing was, which issued the order of abatement

and at this point, it had been nine months since the issue was made, and the only attempt that they did for anything was in november, which was a bogus attempt at cleaning, which completely failed, with the department of health and the dbi because they left piles of visual debris sitting around and all of the tests failed and they lied about them clearing. >> excuse me, since we are hearing both cases, could we allow the speakers 6 minutes or do we limit them to three? >> you can give people almost as much time as you want for a public comment but you have to be consistent. anyone who wants to make public comment has to be provided the same opportunity. >> i think that we need to do six minutes per speaker. >> it was three, and so two three more. >> to bring this up again, because the entire reason that you guys decided last time, that they deserve more time is

because they had made up that story that the tenants had prevented them from getting any work done and it was all because we were bringing a lawsuit and so i have made a time line with the legal aspect in march of last year when we asked them to take responsibility, he replied, that he would not take responsibility, and that he had an attorney, who was and he was consulting them on the legal aspect of this in april, and when the nov was issued the landlord threatened us with eviction and many other things. one of which was legal action. he said that he was hiring every attorney in town to take us down and said that we had better get an attorney but good luck. in may when we were forced to evacuate, we were forced to communicate from that point on ward, only with the attorney, so that it was us on our own, no attorney, and dealing directly with their attorney,

and getting absolutely nowhere, for 6 months, and then, we finally got an attorney hoping that will help and still no lawsuit or anything, that did not help. and then, in november, is finally when we brought the lawsuit. so at that point, december 5th, nothing had been done. and they had been filed after the order of abatement they filed an appeal for the abatement in those, and it was three months before you guys heard it last month, i think, december, and january and february. and yeah. three months. and in that three months, they did nothing, except violate the notice of violations from the health department and remove our property without cleaning it for led or asbestos as they have claimed and we established that, and they have not cleaned it for it now and nothing has changed on the cleaning, whatsoever. and that is a complete fabrication. and so the only thing that they did in those three months was that. and then in this last month,

ignoring that health risk, they have gone on and some things, but they have done them, so poorly, the place is still covered in lead and asbestos and mixed with everything and contaminated out of the hallway and according to all of the documentations of what you need for the health department and i have an e-mail from joe walstuf stating that in writing that you have to clean it before removing the property and that it is still not clean. and i have lists saying that you have to hire these certificated people to do it and i think that there was some confusion last time about the certification for the led and the individuals have to be certified in order to do this work and the individuals that they hired were not certified when they hired them.

>> a couple of things that i wanted to address and first of all, they did remove all of our stuff from the apartment and not all of our stuff actually, but there is still a lot of

properties in there, and let's see, well, let me go through what i found when i and after they sent you that list of things that they said that they had done on the 12th. >> and you can even stick a coin down the cracks in one place and i had very short timing there. and because they kicked me out, because they offered me to come in and then on the second person and the second contractor came in and said that i need to talk to their lawyers to stay in my apartment even though they have not taken possession yet. with our properties still in there. and so, the worst definitely not done. and that is about it. >> and the cracks in the course.

>> and still, dust, and clearly not clean. and with the lead and asbestos and the mold and the only thing that they cleaned for the property is mold and here you can clearly can see the construction and the debris sitting around and as far as windows, they, i don't know, ip not a window repairman, but i can tell that this is just putting the putty in the corner and planning to paint it over, regarding the fixing of the shower, clearly mold, grout, missing, stuff like that, so this is what their newly renovated shower looks like.

they are appealing the decision that the dbi made in december if i have and this it was here 30 days go saying that they stood by that decision and we are not here today to say that we want to give them another 30 days to finish it out and looking at this stall tactics yesterday when they would not let the inspector in and instead showing up with the photographs, at his office, today and kind of indicates that they that is all that i have to say. >> thank you. >> this is the unit that we are

discussing, is in the sole position of mr. clammer and i do not represent them and through the process, because they own the property. they don't have the right of possession and so i am here to tell you that my clients are interested in seeing the resolution of this and i am not here to comment on the allegations by the tenant but i would point out that, what you have been hearing is a lot of conflicting information and what you will have is the dbi inspector going out and really determining what is the problem and what isn't. i think that there is

litigation going on. and a lot of the issues that are being discussed by the tenants here are going to be resolved. and they really should be resolved by a court of law, with a jury, that can determine all of the facts and not really having you sit here and listening to two versions and knowing that within the next week or two, your inspector will be out there and really determining what is really happening out there. and it is true that the photographs either by the clammers or the tenants are not conclusive of what is happening and i think that a 30 day delay is very appropriate for you to have really a final resolution of what is going on here and i believe that there is a lot of progress and i think that the chronology that we can agree on, that when permits were issued and how many work is getting done and i think that

speak to the fact that there is a lot of progress, and i would ask that you strongly consider a 30 day continuance, thank you. >> thank you. >> i am one of the attorneys representing dr. hoer, and i want to address a couple of comments by mr. wo o and i do want to clarify that there are outstanding violations that do impact the entire building and not just the unit 7 in the building and so those violations are outstanding as

well.

it has been two years since they notified them of the problems of the stove in the kitchen and it has been 15 months, since that major leak occurred that destroyed their personal property, and forced them to evacuate and it has been nine months, since the first nov was issued.

and so now they are saying that they are taking the steps, but when that order was issued on december fifth, it was ordered because those long standing issues had not been fixed and not addressed at all. and so the time to fix those, those problems was before the issue was, or before the order was issued. all of the appropriate repairs have been done and the order can be lifted but that is not what the property owners are doing here. and they are asking you to reverse the order of abatement itself. and it is the seven-day period that they had. and instead, they are saying, that even though they have nearly a year, to the day, and almost, and since the novs were issued and even though they

wasted 9 months prior to the order not doing anything and not doing any of the work to abait the violations and they are working on it now and should be good enough and so instead of properly, fixing the outstanding violations and instead of complying with the order, they just want to simply get rid of the order itself. that is why the order is issued and why it should still stand. >> thank you. >> >> any other public comment? >> could i ask, miss bosky, to come back up and just, refresh for us, what the staff recommendation is? in terms of the order of abatement? and also, you know, i know that

maybe the assessment of costs is not final, but a rough estimate to reveal again. >> thank you, commissioners. >> and the staff recommendation was that the hearing officer be upheld and that was based on the testimony up until the last hearing where we did not have substantial progress being made to abait the standing violations, to date, with respect to both cases we are looking at an assessment of cost and we do have it in the staff reports and 4,837 is where we are currently at right now. with the time that we have invested in trying to get compliance on both of these code enforcement cases. and while it is come mendable that the property owners have

made outstanding progress for the staff and we are looking at a situation where it was an extended amount of time to be able to go here. and but, if the board feels that additional more time will allow this, to come to conclusion, for me, whether the order is issued or not, is not as much of a concern as the fact that they pay the assessment of the cost for our time. and if we are going to be able to get the conclusion within the next couple of weeks, if they had come back from the last 30 days and we did not have, you know, some substantial work going on, then, i would not be in this position, of saying that, but, it does appear that they have the people in place and they have the contractors in place and they have called for the inspections and things are moving in a certain direction, does that make all of the occupant? >> no, it doesn't. but, i am, my goal is to try to get this done and to make sure that what is left is saved.

so that is our position right now. >> commissioner walker. >> thank you. thank you, all for coming. >> i actually was not here last week, but i read all of the or the last month, for the original one, and i have read all of the information, i think that the commission last month, was very generous, to the project sponsor to extend 30 days, i think that you are very patient with this process, and i know that the tenants as well. i think that they have been given sufficient time to complete all of the remedying the notices of violation, and i understand that there is still needs to be inspections,