neighbors have this is not we the pain family will be great to have them in the neighborhood this is not an anti antenna let's fourth or fourth what's going on tony that their remodeling their basement but their remodeling the second and third floor and applied for a new permit in the name of the prior owner by none of them describe the existing situation and none of them talks about a 7 room unfortunately we don't have the insight if we had a realtor that was involved and shown the building it was sold

for $800,000 it was half you met 101 enterprise painstaking a nice defy we had a meeting but at the meeting he was clear that okay we're not going to call it a boarding house our family is going to live but with 3 bedrooms and the rest of the bedroom we're going to second degree may not the buildings so the people in the building don't have access to our kitchen and they'll have their own facilities inside the bedroom we said 7, 8, 9 out i understand they're saying okay. we'll comply that's so the reality and the permits are they could existent with the use of

the building and are they if what they want to do is fix the place up for a residence for the family but the city needs to be privy to that and so the neighborhood. >> permit holder or theation agent can speak mr. paging your time is 3 minutes you have 3 minutes total. >> good evening i only have one comments about the meeting i was there derrick the designer for the property during the meeting i never said the word boarding house i was the designer and there for one purpose to speak to the design about the code i

never there on answering construction noise and the addition to the houses if they're going to be blocking any vehicle owners or concerns think that's what the preapplication meeting is for during that time one i believe one of the neighbors who are saving something about boarding housing i said i have no idea ma'am and don't know what the purpose of the owner i only explain the code to the owners and how does the building can be built and the neighbors we're happy to change the design and we are i believe the paynes are happy to

upgrade with the neighbors if there are concerns ask about boarding houses or renting out to folks i believe the paynes are happy to upgrade they lonely or on want to move in for the remodeling the second and third floor it was not proper they didn't get the permits i believe they're trying to workout and we're the agents for the owners we're happy to work this out sects if it's zoned for a duplex i believe they're happy because they want a dui perplex there's only one kitchen no second kitchen anywhere in the property

and that's how we apply as a single-family home that back when the houses were built i don't know about that far back. >> the other microphone. >> this is 23409d about renting out we had a meeting they talk about the single-family home the different trend between a single-family home and at boarding how did i admit it we trying to rent it out before but we renewed the idea and i want to work out. >> i got a question for your designer so when you say designer are you the one that

performed the drawings. >> yes. i do. >> so your stating that that is the current configuration of the property on the as built. >> when we were there doing measurement i believe there are two sets of existing plans in our hands right now and in my understanding i believe there was a typo of one of the planned. >> okay. >> when we were there the plans were submitted to the ground floor alternative that was hallway it was built existing the one for the preapplication meeting i believe was not our typo but we had a mistake on the templates we took a - on the preapplication meeting that might be our typo it's not correct the ground floor existing that floor plan is the

existing condition is the one we simpleminded for the ground floor. >> and the other thing when your client purchased the property there's the title that indicates the property value and the b rp is indicated by the department it's the two unit building not that it was never a single-family home when you purchased the property it was a two unit believe so, you know i know at this point the best thing to work with accident department in determining what is there and what's supposed to be there. >> okay. >> okay anything further from

the department mr. duffy mr. sanchez commissioners the matter is auditors - yours. >> we don't have enough information. >> do we do that or deny the appeal. >> what will we do. >> i'm recommend that we continue with allow the building inspection to review the first to review the permit then compare it to the exist site and i think they need to have some explanation with the permit holder i would suggest you dpo do that i'm not going to do at this point what the zoning administrator said to revoke the permit we don't have enough

information. >> that's your motion. >> is the permit holder here did you said what i said. >> okay basically you'll need to go and meet with the believable and review did drawings and the exist building with them they can explain to you what you can or can't do come forward. >> commissioners just a quick question is that in the form of a report before the next hearing would you like a report on the building we're going to go into the two unit how many rooms i hope they haven't demolished much if they've started the

extensive demolition it is going to be hard hopefully, we'll goat to the bottom i want to streets we're extremely busy but we're going to need some time to get the report together so it just we'll do it. >> the board rerevokes the permit they're out a longer than time. >> i understand that. >> whether there's education so they can be corrected or perhaps it's appropriate and it's pretty clear this is a legal two unit not a single-family home it may have been commemorated we come back the next invite and say it got misrepresented it should

have been two unit that didn't moaning maple it won't be revoked at the next hearing. >> i'm not clear on granting the appeal and revoking the permit. >> the 3 r report is significant i'm sure you're aware of they had it wrongs before there's one that was wrong so let me i agree commissioner fung let's give it a few weeks and i'm come back what a report address we'll take it from under. >> the reason i'm suggesting i think we're jumping the gun i don't have enough information to see or is that permit is not appropriate or code compliant. >> but there's a linguistic clarity. >> it doesn't matter if it's

code compliant all we're hearing a hearsay. >> uh-huh. >> i'll go along with that but. >> commissioners, if they have the meeting and it turns out the permit can't continue the permit holder could a cancel the permit and the appeal will go away and not have to come back to the board. >> that's a good suggestion. >> do you want to set a date and it depends on on the department. >> we'll need at least a month to get this done. >> added to the 18th arc madam clerk this report is is bids too. >> perhaps the 18th.

>> will that work for you. >> does that work to the permit holder and the appellant? >> well, the other alternate it two months to march 18 of the that is giving the department for leeway. >> mr. duffy will the february 18th work for you. >> okay. >> can you come to speak to the microphone. >> that is a break formal school and both the appellant is out of town if we could push it over to the next meeting. >> it's quite bad in terms of our workload you represented him. >> on the 18th i'm going to be

taking my son to different colleges. >> march 18th march 18th no meetings on the fourth or 11. >> march 18th. >> i'm here if you - come forth let me explain be that you can use that time to work with the department to do what is code compliant. >> i want to do it can they make it airline the construction is being halted we're losing money we are craving to moving in. >> unfortunately, the risks your facing your permit maybe revoked.

>> it has to be march 18th. >> based on our schedule it looked like that's all we can do. >> you have the option to decide if you need a new permit i can cancel the permit and get a new permit to start cleaner. >> i don't know that. >> the understanding your permit is list in a single-family residence and according to what we dermatitis a two unit building so your permit is automatically no good therefore you might get this resolved prior to march. >> do you understand that. >> we do. >> i'm going to move to continue this case until march 18th. >> okay. do you want to allow additional briefing or the report from the dbi. >> we'll allow additional

briefing and how many pages and a since not that much information we'll allow a full briefing. >> a whole schedule of briefing or simultaneous. >> no let's do the regular schedule. >> the motion from commissioner fung to continue this matter to march 18th to allow a site visit and the briefing schedule is reset prior to the calendar and one previous for the dbi and permit holder on that motion. >> commissioner president lazarus. >> commissioner honda. >> commissioner wilson thank you the vote is 4 to zero it's continued to march 18th thank you. >> okay. we're now calling

appeal number item a gregg vs. the department of public health the property on ocean avenue protesting the issuance to waterfall the hearing was held on july 23rd and on for further consideration today it was continued to allow time for the department of building inspection to submit the audio mr. pacheco please re-administer the oath of office for anyone that hadn't taken it. >> if you were not here for 5 o'clock please replaced and say i do only if you intend to testify okay.

>> do you solemnly swear or affirm the testimony you're about to give will be the whole truth and nothing but the truth? >> i do. >> thank you great, thank you so much mr. robert you can begin. >> thank you for everyone to being patient with our schedule this evening utility good evening i'm represent the appellant mr. shep i know it's been a long time centuries we were here on the matter i want to speak briefly one of the issues that came up the main reason the board continued this matter to find out information about who the applicant was below and loss to appear on issues that might interest you from the audio recording.

>> it wasn't of good quality it was a couple of things that were clear one is that ms. mitchell claimed she was the sole applicant and dpw in fact step forwarded and said no, they considered mr. mendez because of the president of the corporation reason and the question of who's the plant come down to an issue of control figure mr. men did he see was the controller he should be considered an appellant in the briefing which waterfall has summit they so say no the corporation was anothers applicant if that's the case the

health code riders that appellant all offers and ceo's be - importantly this bodies role is essential to be a backstop your discretion is broad and you don't need to find that dpw made an error in law your role and your responsibility to was the permit decision in the best interest of the public did it promote the public safety and welfare it's much broader than that the standards are incorrect you don't need a criminal violation of any soft sort the important issue is this appellant trutsz worthy they've submitted to the

board they've paid the taxes. >> a they have not been forthright the lawsuit was dismissed the court ordered them to give the documents to support their claims rather than do 38 that they've dismissed the cats and it should be restored to him. >> thank you. we hear from the attorney of waterfall or whoever is representing them. >> i'm the attorney for the waterfall wellness our position is that the appellant has not raised any you valuetion as stated in my brief and the permit was to be issued in the

name of wellness inc. mitchell nifshl went to dpw at their request and as the cooperative secretary indicated in the application it says applicant operator underneath it says if corporate please indicate the decision police officer role she was, in fact the secretary her failure to include mr. mendosa position as president and controlling body or controlling individual for the cooperative utilized proper procedures under all applicable lour law to be a

permit person he was is on file with a background check the dpw p will receive the notifications from the department of justice if there's any violation by mr. mendez and mr. mendosa position they're past history everything on file and implemented a sole application analysis as if his name had been on the application in 2012, we have the documentary evidence to support this and happy to provide it greg stepped up to the plate down and resigned as an officer and employee of the water falls inc. basically the dispackaging information and rampant claims in the appeal have been totaled

unsupported that i even though evidence any brief supports the fact we have the factual dispute i'm sure you're aware of this is not the proper forum to settlement the disputes between the business parties the appellant is quite office is misusing this forum to gain vandal in anti clustering laws he's trying to on an operation down the street all the documentary evidence and snchlz showed he resigned from the board and had no position with wellness cooperative inc. the application was not a decision. >> we can hear from the

directing your attention and anyone in the overflow room make our way to this room and speak under public comment. >> good afternoon, commissioners additional madam president i'm on behalf of respondent first off, i want to apologize regarding the quality of the recording it was extremely difficult to hear. >> it was fine. >> the light show was fine. >> pardon me. >> the light show was fine good something worked in response i actually contacted the deputy director and informed her to immediately rectify with the improved recording device but i think there was two things were clear and what could be

heard on this cd one as was appointed the dpw presented this case to the director and in its presentation identified kari mitchel and mr. mendez as the director preceded to hear the matter to review all the documents including the bye laws etc. with the understanding that both were the applicant the permit itself was issued to the corporation but the applicant were the two individual why is that important? simply because dpw has to have someone to contact and hold responsible to say

needs to know who is overseeing the operation now much has been made about mr. mendez character undoubtedly no doubt about it and as appointment the department ran a background check a live scan check it came back clear and it's been clear ever since they've not received any updates indicating any sort of offenses nor received any police reports regarding criminal activity at the location so we found we have 3 minutes so the second thing that's clear from the cd how much public comment was provide to the director unusual amount it was part of

both but there's quite a bit of public comment provide there no support of terry are a mitchel and mr. mendez thank you. >> thank you we can take public comment now may i see a show of hands how many people intend to speak okay first person can step forward and also okay two imaginations because of the hour and if there's people in the overflow room please come forward and if other people are billing willing to line up on the far side of the room and good evening madam president and board members and staff i'm ed with the united food and commercial workers union i've had the honor to

appear before the board i'd like to rescuer this board saw and felt something with the former attorney this is another hide the ball by the operators of this water fall wellness we pulled out we were going to organize at waterfall if mr. shep was in charge definitely look at the hide the balls that have been going on since this has started it's clear mr. shep didn't relinquish his permit and waterfall wouldn't be what it is today, i have to refute b what the horrible attorney said there

was criminal activity at the wellness there was one a fire two an illegal grow and through 3 a fire alarm i ask you please give mr. shep the opportunity to get back what is rightfully his and. >> thank you. next speaker, please. >> good evening my name is a oscar i'm standing in support of waterfall wellness i'm an employee under mr. shep and mr. malcolm heinicke dices is i want to say my he comparisons or experience has been a good one i organize clean up crews and feed do community