let's see. so over here is the existing entry, over here's the proposed . the proposed intriz with the unequal doors and a ramp up and a power opener since we can't do landings. and that's the set of doors we' talking about. when i went in and talked with the historic preservation planner and asked him how he wanted the historic issue addressed we talked about a few things and what he said was that he thought the best thing was to instead of keep the existing doors, he thought the besz thing was to replace

them with remly ka doors, replica doors that are unequal in size so that's what we got a permit for. so i'm available for any questions. you mind if i call students to speak. >> if that's how you wish to use your time, sure. >> good evening ladies and gentlemen, my name is kevin. i have come here today to discuss about the rewarding opportunity that i have stumbled upon because of charity cultural services scepter. i recently lost my job in june and i have learned that they provide tuition free culinary

program, including bartending classes. i immediately signed up for the classes early august this year and notified that the classes weren't going to begin until september due to uncompleted construction work on that unit with the bar. i learned that the previous lessons were all head at far east cafe but the owner needed to open up the restaurant two-and-a-half hours early ahead to have time so that we can use the space. it was a torture for someone who needs to work late at night. they expected the space allocated for bartending classes to be completed soon, thus made the decision to move the classes back to the center. when the classes finally started on september 22, which was fairly late compared to the previous fall cycles we found out our facility

comprised of a temporary bar made of wooden planks on top of a table. we were told we'd move to the new bar when the project was funnished. unfortunately i granl waited at the end of november and the bartending class was still unfinished. i still learned how to mix dringzs but the setting and equipment wasn't there. i have wasn't able to get the complete satisfaction of making drinks. i understand there were concerns for protecting a historical building but they don't have any intention of tearing it down or replacing it. they want to preserve the construction of the building by conducting repairs that are necessary and essential to making the building more functional and accessible for everyone, especially the disadvantaged clients they serve from the community. please allow them to complete the project as soon as possible.

thank you. >> we have one more student. all right. >> you have three minutes of rebuttal. >> you'll have three minutes for rebuttal. >> and they can speak under public comment too. >> mr. tigue >> this is just a bit of history discussed and in the brief that there were appeals before you several years ago and the board of appeals did rule at that time to acquire

this property to state that the property owner agrees that if any work to the facade of the subject building following conditions shall apply and the conditions are essentially the removal of the garbage room or relocation and the doorway. the subject permit was reviewed by our head of historic preservation and was approved over-the-counter on september 30 of this year. in terms of the scope of work it's kind of an evolution to figure it out because the actual permit itself on the front of the permit has one description. the planner and the approval box in the back of the permit elaborated a little bit to kind of clarify what the actual plans show. often the description on the front is a summary of what

have the actual plans show and do not provide every detail. the two main parts to the project are the internal work to provide the connection between the spaces and the stairs, but i think the work that's real vanlt today is the exterior work and that consists of essentially keeping the same opening in the facade where the existing two doors existed for 735, but replacing them in kind with wood to the question before you tonight, i believe, is whether or not that work consists would be interpreted and be the modification to the facade per the nsr that is

recorded on the property and whether additional world would trigger the work laid out in the nsr. i'm available for any questions you may have. >> there was no option but to come mriel with the ada; is that correct, once the work was proposed? >> i'd have to refer to dbi on that. i don't think the permit was initiated at ada issues, it was due to their own private issues of expansion, but after they made that decision to go forward i do not know if the ada became a requirement or not or how dbi handled that as a building code issue. #12k3w4r the building permit that i have of the permit

details report [inaudible] between 731 and 735 and provide accessibility to 731, new doors to match existing and include power door assist. the building permit got filed on 30th of september, 2014, a form [inaudible]. it got issued on the third of october, 2014 and suspendsed because of the appeal on the 16th of october 2014. it was reviewed by our building plan check staff and i did get a quick look at the plans in the hallway earlier on there with the architect. they weren't in the preef but he had them with him and it looks like it's an improvement for the brans, for the doorways to get the width on the door to pro#1r50id a power door operator that helps with accessibility and then on the inside there's a level change between the two tenant spaces

where they're expanded and therefore they put in a stairway with striping and handrails. there wasn't any room for a ramp. it looks like a tight space. but certainly from what i saw it looks like it was properly reviewed. i remember being with this property a lot probably three or four years ago when we were dealing with it. i got a lot of education on the his rhode island and all the issues down there so to say i know there's issues regarding preservation which are planning, but from building department point of view, and i heard the access obviously disabled access and getting disabled into the building is important. when that does happen we make sure if you're going to change the entrance, for example if the entrance is 5 feet and a lot of these old buildings,

you've got two 30 inch doors, well, that's not wide enough for wheelchair accessibility so you have uneven doors. you put in a 3 foot and 2 foot door which is what happened here as the architect explained. that's standard procedure. once you get into preservation issues and what the materials are we leave that to the planning department and it looks like the entrance is being modified to meet accessibility requirement ls. that's ability all i have to say if anybody has any questions. >> to chime off our president's question, so was ada required prior or did additional square footage trigger this requirement? >> no. i believe that was voluntary on their behalf to make this modification. i have don't have any

enforcement from dbi. certainly there could have been the argument tect or mr. lee may knee to speak of it. i don't have anything with me tonight that point to a notice of violation or anything like that from dbi. that may have been someone that may have been their own choice to make it more act saysable. a lot of people do that. i don't have anything to say we made them do that. >> governmental grants require accessible facilities. >> there were some older ground that said to preserve it so i think i heard that earlier as well. dbi did not initiate the work that i'm aware of. >> okay. >> can i see a show of hands how many people would like to speak under public comment. ? please step forward. .

>> hi, i've been a [inaudible] since mid 2011. i received [inaudible] i was an employee for three years and during that three years in employment my family have been through a very difficult hardship and my family pray allot for a job [inaudible] and they provide me an opportunity and prepare me to series of tests and interview and have me get into a rewarding career. i'm able to support my family and have developed a skill as a student [inaudible] mechanic. with their help at ccsc i hope that we can be extended to

other people as they have new project right now with more space and can help more people desperately to get a new job or skill to help support their family since i have. thank you. >> thank you. >> is there any other public comment. seeing none we can have rebuttal. you have three minutes. >> ladies and gentlemen of the board, i have think it's clear again that i'm not objecting to there being ada issues dealt with with this facility. my point is we've been through round after round after round of public hearing. once

oh, it's just a request for this or that and unfortunately if you let the camel put its nose under the tent before long the whole camel's under the tent and that's what we've been dealing with for 15 years. i'd like to see the ada accessibility dealt with but dealt with in the context of our decisions here have dealt with in the past as section 106 review dealt with in the past. if those doors are replaced with other doors that are mismatched, the entire basis of what this has been about is pulled out. the doors -- again, i don't want to get to how to address it correctly because it's a moving target but if that's going to become a discussion that door is wide enough where, because the preservation of the property has been deemed significant you can bring a wheelchair

through evenl with a power door opener with two doors that are not mismatched in size. those particular doors on this property as you'll see in your pictures have been completely restored and are ready to last aerz century. i have spent thousands of hours working on those doors and so to replace them with something lesser doesn't fit into the conversation that we've been having about restoring in a proper project with proper funding to do the entire facade as a -- to make it a landmark -- official landmark, which is an unofficial one as it stand. what i'd like to request from you is we get back to the discussion about the fact that we previously said we were not going to proshield with further piecemealing and direct this discussion towards how can it be brought back to the overall plan for the property and then we can look

at if there are outstanding accessibility issues how are they proper live dealt with, not one little bit by one little bit, but in the context of the entire property because had it been addressed that way from the beginning none of this would have happened. it would have been one review for one project. it would have been oekz how do you deal with accessibility for the whole building and move forward with one plan. that's it. i thank you very much for you attention and look forward to any further questions. >> i have a question. so as the appellant, you say we. who is we? >> we is me and all the other network of people who have supported this project. i haven't existed in a vacuum. i have in my personal contacts over 1,000 people who are marked as china town and that's china town in the context of preservation and those are my friends and associates and people who have

supported me all along throughout this. recently made this official into my own non profit. there's a board of people that constitute that as well who are various people from the community and within various- >> that answered my question. thank you. >> thank you. . >> mr. lee, you have three minutes of rebuttal. >> commissioners, i have personally made the point to contact the appellant and said if there's anything we can do to get it on a larger scale, he mentioned the good point, where's the funding coming from? i staid you can get the funding i'll work with you for the overall picture, not just piecemeal. his idea was to refurbish the entire facade of the building and again of course again, i spoke to him tonight. we worked again on it we take care of the entire fa facade

in the near future. in this project we must move forward because the funding is fairly limited and the space is fairly limited for our graduates. tomorrow we have a graduating class of 20 people in the culinary area. they all come to participate and this culinary graduation runs parallel with the cooking school. credibility -- we have a 20 week training program and it's for graduates and classes tomorrow so i'm looking forward to the future of ccsc and appreciate your time. >> mr. lee, was any effort made to discuss this particular permit and its scope with mr. blie? >> not exactly, no. we -- the permit design was simply by the engineer, you heard him spoke, mr.

crestfield. as far as the design of the exterior two doors, i reached out to him. i said look, i'll meet with you. let's go through it. it's something you can help us out, give us some idea. of course we have no result on it. i still reach out to him. >> there's two things here. one is that if you have an accessible entry/exit you can't have the gate that requires the special implement. right now it has a metal gate in front of it. is -- if that is deemed an accessible entry or exit you can't have anything that requires a special implement to open it. secondly, both doors, there are hardware that opens two

doors. >> good to know. and we're proposing the current permits. >> your curb permit redoing the doors, but they're custom doors made to match what is existing. >> good to know. we're looking to immediately. we can find something like this we'd like to implement it. >> by the way, what is the -- when they talk about appellants talk about mismatch and you've indicated one door leaf is bigger, how much bigger is it than the other one? >> four inches. >> thank you. anything further?

>> i just heard from a building inspector that recommended the [inaudible] whefrz i state that here that means there's no notice of violation, there's nothing in the complaint tracking system so it could be a correction notice which doesn't show up in the dbi system. that would be in the building inspector system. if that i have had inspections out there, there's a possibility that an inspector had asked him to do something with this and this is where this got triggered from. they didn't state that on their permit. normally smtsdz on the permit you'll say to comply with building inspector's correction notice. they didn't say that. it's not in the brief. i just sat down and the architect corrected me. i apologize but there wouldn't have been anything in the records to show that here tonight. i need to go back and see

where that came from because that building inspector may not have realized all the issues that existed prior to this building via the nsr. i certainly do pautz because i was at the board of appeals on 731 and at 731 commercial a lot and i know we need to get this right and commissioner function, on the doors, they're probably is a way to do that with the two openers and the doors, but a lot of times we make the 5 foot open a 3 foot with the leaf. if it's preservation i want's preservation. there's always a balance there. >> it's easier to buy a stock 2 foot door and 3 foot door. >> with this preservation i'm not sure -- this isn't a 2 foot and 3 foot.

these would have to be custom made. . i belief they are. >> yeah, they are. >> isn't there a threshold too before you have to upgrade the facility to full ada? >> yes, there is. they may have had a hardship in those doors. there's nothing in the brief to say they were made to do that. . they can do it voluntarily, which is fine, but if the building inspect thor has made a call and i don't know about it and i'm up here speaking about it on behalf of that department we may need time to speak about it because there are a lot of permits they're trying to close out from three, four years ago and that's what the architect is telling me here. you may want to have them speak to that but there's nothing that i know about officially apart from what i'm being told from an architect. >> well we made the changes

previously in terms of of getting rid of the dropped ceiling because of the impact it had on the exterior. >> i know. this was a time consuming issue but i thought we got it so we don't want to make any wrong moves and i don't think either side want to do that. i don't. >> if you didn't have to do this do you want to do it? >> if we don't have to do it, we won't do it. >> okay. >> then we need to have a little more time. >> do you have something to add to what i just talked about.

>> come forward. please wait until the commissioner returns until you start speaking. >> i don't have the the documents here, but what i found is they were working on a permit from 2010 and on those permit drawings, the is

engineer had shown making a bathroom accessible and a path of travel that turned out to have a 21 inch height difference which he hadn't realized. so when the field inspector saw that that was there that was not an accessible path of travel to the accessible bathroom from the other space he said oh you need to have the entrance of 735 but accessible and that 's when i got brought in to solve that problem. that was a correction notice not a notice of violation on the field inspector that triggered this. >> in looking at the previous drawings you're saying? a: right. there's something that didn't work the way the previous design had been designed in

terms of accessibility and there wasn't space to deal with that internally. it had room for a lift, there wasn't room for a ramp. >> but the adjustment then to the differential height what does that have to do with the front door? >> coming in a different way. >> right, right. that was my understanding. >> so the other space has access to bathroom in the base m. they have an accessible path of travel to the toilet room in the new space than wasn't accessible. >> yeah, but that path of travel goes outside. >> well, no, i'm saying is the 731 path of travel to a toilet room is in the 731 entrance into an accessible elevator

to an accessible bathroom so to get there you have to have that coming from the street so they're considered separate classroom areas with separate access from the street. >> thank you. i'm not sure we need to give you more time then, mr. duffy, unless you feel that there's something that could be done with respect to the front door. >> well, [inaudible] he's the district building inspector he's pretty knowledgeable on the ada codes, but if something is wrong -- it's easy to draw something on the plans and when you get there it's wrong so we have to then address that and usually if he needed a revision permit or another permit, but i don't know that without speaking to him and it's up to the board

what you want to do with this permit but if we triggered the accessibility at the front door then that has created the appeal. i don't think the appellant is worried about the inside stair but certainly the access to the front is the issue so i don't -- if you want to give me more time to go back to dbi and continue it and see where this triggered. i don't mind going down there with the inspector and figuring it out where he was coming from. i think we could give that a chance. >> i think it's reasonable. >> thank you. >> i would move to continue this. how much time do you need mr. duffy? >> i could get it done before the next hearing, january 14. >> is that okay with the

permit holder and appellant? >> hold on. can i change that? the inspector's going to ireland for christmas. >> we're talking about january 14. >> i know, he's going for a long time. >> okay. he needs to be there. yeah, 21st. let's give it a little bit more time. he'll be back by then. >> and the continuance is to allow for dbi inspection. >> to verify what requirement they have made upon the facility. >> how we ended up with the removal of the threshold