example of that. we invested hundreds of millions of dollars in this for elcome to the meeting of safety, and disaster preparedness that we are also investing in the accessibility of our critical infrastructure. every year, on this date, it is always a good reminder to update your plans, and make sure that your friends have your phone numbers and make sure that you have your prescriptions written down. and make sure that you have the few extra of those pills. and this is your time to revisit your kits and your plans and your friends and your relationships. and our new mod web page has a disaster preparedness button down on the first home page. and i encourage you to go there to look at some of your resources and also, as the

department of emergency website for sf 72, and also has the additional resources including resources for people with disabilities. so go home and be safe and celebrate. >> thank you. next up we have item number 1 3, information item correspondence. >> there is no correspondence. >> okay. >> next up we have number 1 4, discussion item, council member's comments and announcements. >> we have one announcement from chair supanich. >> yes. on october 30th, from noon until 4:00, at the lgbt center on market street, there is a community out reach there for people who are over 50 and living with hiv or aids. and there are two topics, one is employment. and the other is creating a

life we never thought that we would have and it is about finding purpose and meaning in your life. i strongly encourage the folks to attend and again, that is october 30th, from noon to four, at the lgbt center on market. >> okay, is that an item that you would like us to post on our google calendar on our modweb page? >> i would love that. >> let me add that there will be booths with community based organization and agencies, giving information to folks. so if the project homeless connect, on it and for the hiv community. >> great. thank you. >> are there any other announcements or comments from council members? >> i have one, i would like to go ahead and point out that there is currently a letter writing campaign that is being undertaken by the independent living resource center of san

francisco and this is for bart and in regards to, it is accessibility or let's see the lack thereof. and for its upcoming new updated bart cars if you are interested in being a part of this initiative, and you may contact the community organizer for the independent living resource center of san francisco. and which would be feona hensy, you can contact her by the offices at 415-543-6222. or you may also contact her by e-mail at fiona@ilrcsf.org and i do believe that she is in aat the pointed ans there as well if you would like to speak to her more about this issue.

>> i see that there is one more announcement from the staff? >> one more announcement and thank you for your patience. >> we have sent it out on the e-mail, but on tuesday, october 21, at 2:00 p.m., at the san francisco main library, in the odd auditor um on the lower level there is a free screening of the emp erus, the lives of a single hotel, and this sponsored by people in sros, including the collaborativive, and china town, and cdc and aids legal referral panel and the independent resource center and senior and disability and action and others, and the main library, is fully wheelchair accessible and you can call for accommodations by the days past.

but i am just going to repeat again, tuesday, october 21, 2:00 p.m., san francisco main library, the (inaudible) auditor um. >> thank you, to the individual brought that to our attention and that is a big event that will get a lot of attention and reception. >> moving on to the last item, adjourn. i would like to thank everyone for coming to attend today as well as all of the speakers i know that this is the first of a long discussion on employment here in san francisco for people with disabilities. thank you.plans and we do

>> we are in open session and we are in item seven and i think that the next item to consider is whether there is any motion to disclose or any or all of what was discussed in the closed session. >> and i would recommend and move that we do not disclose, what was discussed in closed session. but i would commend the director for a great job. and we thank you for assisting us in doing our job. >> okay. >> and is there any public comment on that motion? >> okay. seeing none, >> one last comment,. there is, that the president of the board will be writing up something that will go into the personnel file. >> okay. >> we have a motion from commissioner fung to not disclose the contents of the

closed session. on that motion, to not disclose the vice president is absent, president lazarus? >> aye. >> commissioner honda. >> aye. >> and wilson. >> aye. >> four to 0 to not disclose the contents of this closed session, thank you. >> commissioners there is no further business this evening. >> we are adjourned. break. >> 2k7 meeting of the san

francisco board of appeals we're on item 10 michael vs. the department of building inspection property is at 2047 polk street for the 2014 to gathering young of a plumbing permit remove the cap off a gas pipe and it those furnace consideration to allow the deniable to conclude it's analysis of the dwnl dwelling status i understand that commissioner wilson has reviewed the file. >> yes. i have. >> mr. duffy with the research and hear what he has to say power points content 20 men's. >> commissioners there was some

evidence that we have a cf c the building was fy in ground floor with a retail residential above and dbi had notes they were seeing it as two unit i went back to dbi and presented the cf c it the housing intersection services the complaint that housing inspector had been hey challenged his notes overhead - - a little bit on the bottom just to - >> and mr. pacheco if you can try to address the flickering

problem. >> so if you can read the that better. >> not open ear our screen. >> august 18th from the housing inspector grady states he got the records this present use of a single-family dwelling previous enterprise was incorrect that matches what i was saying rarpdz to the sift of completion on the overhead now and this was a certificate dated 1995 the second floor with the single-family dwelling over the first floor commercial the other issue this work was on a plumbing permit and i went back to dbi and spoke to other

people there and i spoke to the chief plumbing inspector who was in agreement with me this type of work will require a building permit to show the removal of the stove or sink we'll want a building permit with that i'm available for questions. >> okay. thank you hear from the permit holder. >> good evening, members of the board i'm dave krou crow i'm the attorney for the appellant. >> no, from the permit holder next and sorry. >> good evening, commissioners sam for gary young the permit holder i don't have a lot to add other

than what mr. duffy said it was conformed legal configuration for this permit was one commercial floor below and one residential floor we have here an illegal unit built prior to my client buying the property the disagreement is why the planning department would require anything other than the department we've required and, in fact, why require a permit at all our position being if we roach the tenant from the premises and never rented again we've complied one probation officer one provision we've demolished or audits permanently removed the remedy that's our good faith intent the mechanism is provided

in the rent ordinance that says in the event that a landlord performs a illegal eviction we're not going to take it out of the rental use in the circumstances it's proven we've performed a wrongful eviction under the triple penalties under the ordinance the enforcement metabolism for that situation is a private enforcement mechanism this unit is in a unit that will fall under the new sections of the planning code as mr. sanchez pointed out but the legalization of a illegal unit the trig the discretionary review you have 3 residential units on the property we don't have i respectfully request the board run state the permit i'm

available for questions if you're offering. >> okay. thank you mr. crow. >> sorry i'm a bit anxious good evening members of the board building code section 106 a .1.12 states wherever a change in occupancy or use is made a building permit shall be required to legalize the changed use or occupancy and this is been confirmed by the planning department and the building inspection law doesn't provide for some sort of different process because the unit is quote/unquote illegal

a building permit is required to change the use which is exactly what the permit holler holder is doing when he plans to remove the unit from housing use and evict my client navigate he's tried to evict my client a permit holder has filed last month filed an unlawful detainer a lawsuit to evict my client we've demurred because the planning permit was not the proper permit to remove from the housing use you've heard prosecute your experts the permit hordes response to the demur he stated 31st his intent in filing the plumbing permit to remove the unit to change it's use to change it's occupancy

navigate he also stated in his restraining order response to our demur a no permit was necessary well, the; is that right testimony and the building code says otherwise the court is looking for guidance we have a ruling from the court the judge stated the proceeding and ruled if the permit is denied or rejected he'll sustain the demur meaning the unlawful detainer can be dismissed the plumbing permit at issue can't be used to change the unit use or occupancy the law requires a building permit we ask you revoke the plumbing permit because it can't be used to remove the united from housing use and also to revoke the permit to conclude that matter and stop the permit holders unnecessary litigation

thank you. >> mr. sanchez did i want to speak on this? >> thank you scott sanchez planning staff to be brief to commercialism this is not subject to the mayors policy the executive directive the planning code was referenced that's inaccurate it allows supervisor chiu legislation this year that louts the in-law units to be legalized under the possible street commercial district which the property is workplace a second unit is allowed we'll have to review the plans to making sure make sure the code is compliant to allow legalization without meeting a lot of those requirements in regards to the permit we ask them to permit the illegal unit

and i'll let mr. duffy speak to that if the board wishes. >> any public comment on that item? okay. seeing none commissioners, if you have questions for mr. duffy we'll call him back or the matter is submitted. >> mr. duffy. >> commissioners to clarify comments by the attorneys the reason a building permit is required in this case you'll need a set of plans to show there's illegal construction and converting it back to the use one thing the housing inspector has not issued a notice of violation which says an illegal unit created behind a legal space probably what he is going to do is issue a notice of

violation as a illegal dwelling unit with plans to divert it but certainly that area in our dbi reported it seem like i imagine it as a storage space behind a reciprocal space not a dwelling space the department needs a set of plans with a permit to show your removing is the president of the united states that's duplicate by a permit there is in use of occupancy stated by itself interest you're not changing the use of occupancy your simply reverting that back to the use if that's what the building permit wants to show. >> to be clear what would drinker the issuance of the n o b the awareness of this. >> yes. the we received a

complaint dbi received a complaint with the housing inspectors saying illegal unit behind commercial says that the housing inspector acknowledged on august 18th on the overhead earlier showed the perpetrate use and occupancy is a single-family dwelling and if he goes there and sees a commercial says that a residential space or both and a residential unit behind it he's left with no option. >> i guess i missed the fang there's been a complaint filed. >> yes. that's still under investigation i'm not you can't why we hadn't dwol to that that is what normal happens. >> it will result in an negotiation n o b i'm not sure why he hadn't gotten around to it by that's the next step okay. all in

actually outlet the way to clear an n o b is to submit a set of plans. >> that's what i said dbi has not instructed them to do with but with illegal unit that's what we have been doing unless the culture is changing with the illegal units but it is the legal construction we'll be ask them to revert it to the last legal use or try to convert to a legal use that's their choice but it requires a building permit and requires an electrical prilt permit. >> what about the plumbing permit. >> that plumbing permit could stay in place in my opinion it is required at some point but we need a building permit along with that to with the set of

plans to show the removal that area being readvert bye back to the last use. >> if it's in place. >> what. >> if the plumbing permit he stays this plays it's a legal permit and the work to be performed under that california be executed by that. >> maybe we could do condition it so the permit can be conditioned to be in place not lout to do the work. >> it could be conditioned here. >> yeah. >> yep. >> thank you. >> okay commissioners the matter is yours. >> well, i think there's still more process that definitely has to occur before the permit

holder therefore he'll need to clean up everything at one time i prefer they do it all at once and clear that up as far as the records go i would move to excuse me. i would not support the appeal of the permit but i would support the conditioning of the plumbing permit to not begin until they've received their building permit. >> i have no problem. >> no, i don't either make a motion. >> move to deny the excuse me. to grant the appeal and

condition the issuance of the plumbing permit upon the issuance of a building permit to remove the illegal unit. >> okay. so we will just in our language make sure that the permit stays suspended until the permit is issued and an a appeal process is achieved. >> the building permit to be specific this should be issued to readvert to the last use that's correct; is that correct. >> the last legal use.

>> yeah. >> the monoxide from commissioner fung to uphold the permit on conditions that the suspension remain in place until a building permit for remove or removal of the illegal unit and readvert it to last legal use has been issued okay on that motion to uphold with that condition vice president is absence commissioner president lazarus commissioner honda commissioner wilson thank you the vote is 4 to zero this permit is upheld with that condition. >> item 11 appeal an hour and a

half vs. the city to 55 treat avenue appealing the denial to legalize window replacement complete without permit none of the replacement understanding windows are being done start with the appellant. >> thank you very much good evening, commissioners i'm heather one of the 5 pertains from 5551 on treat i'm here to request the board overturn the department planning of our permit and allows us to have the vanilla windows it is your authority to require replacement for the window guidelines we also understand as the intent of the pelosi to make sure that the sister is ac acting with the

discretion that is allowed to each city department and this department to be fair in reviewing this case we believe you should use your discretion and allow the windows to remain in place given the history and inspectors history the gentle consistency of the character of the neighborhood and the cities balance with the aesthetic concerns and oils in our submittal we ask you to apply reason not blinded hearing to guidelines and allow is to remain the windows until replacement in the future there's a couple of key points first we believe we've deemed within air grief the windows were instead of at the time of

the 2004 permit and prior to the use of building those permits were opened we requested the permits be closed a permit was taken out to renew the permits and a building inspector visited our property 3 days after the request and final the permits so we've thoroughly believed all the work from the remodel permit was final and closed that includes the windows we relied on the city requirement to do due diligence in attention e addition to our due diligence it's unreasonable and unfair to seem otherwise to do so means the city can require changes to property when no plans are required we maintain the remodeled permit that included

the window and the city department failed in their process and the permit were final we're not illegal illegal listing the windows so the been will argue they're not installed in permit we august w the windows were installed in 2005 only the 903 guidelines are in effect and should be used this is important distinction because the 2003 standards have no more flexibility in window appropriateness then the 2012 standards nevertheless in our brief weed we've made the finding per the 2003 and 2012 standards to allow us to remain the windows they have the same proposition and style and trim and casings they're only 3

differences between the windows that were installed and the existing windows on the vrp floor about one half to quarter of an inch between the vanilla windows upstairs and the lower two floors their insignificant and have occurred no way due to the fact the windows are nonetheless mrumgd since the building was built the treatment on the yes, ma'am of the windows, however, the department has been inconsistent with or women and children our neighborhood and beyond and the respiratory to install those on wooden windows and seemingly more important is the window material, however, the department notes in the denial of our