permits. >> mr. well in her any rebuttal. >> so the permits the tree remove permits i looked at on the 14th of september 4th months i don't know where that lands me am a good, i think i'm good it's not up for discussion but the bird survey yes i'll conduct the bird survey and yes i'll comply with the findings it is $10,000 if you get caught violating it i have no intention of doing that that's all i can think of. >> thank you mr.les in her.

>> commissioners neil with the mapping there are are copies of the actual permits here's one two, this one was for 601 gonzales and others issued on september 16th good for 6 months to address earlier public comment the person mentioned they would require probably require temporary occupancy permit for the replanting of trees if they plan to occupy the public right-of-way that's correct they'll be required to have temporary permits glad to

answer questions. >> is the 6 months when the work has to be started or completed. >> i believe i'm not sure the work has to start but within the 6 months. >> okay commissioners the matter is submitted. >> i'm happy to jump in i haven't heard anything to make me building those permits were issued without being code compliant i'll uphold the permits tonight. >> i concur with that position. >> i'm good. >> commissioners if you're going to uphold this permit you might want to add a recommendation or condition that the department reset the time

period because it's all for november occupancy is for a specific date in november so you can struck the department a. >> i'll move to deny the appeal uphold the permits their code compliant and instruct the department to reset the dates in the permit. >> in the permits yes. okay. >> madam director our agenda indicates different date of issuance issuance. >> date of issuance we want to correct the record for that purpose. >> the date of ownerships for the temporary occupancy permits he i'm sorry. >> yes. it says october 31st permits that the gentleman put on were a different permit of the occupancy. >> okay. >> mr. pacheco when you're

ready. >> we have a motion from commissioner fong or. >> commissioner president lazarus. >> where we have a motion from commissioner president lazarus to uphold all 3 permits that the dpw reset the dates and this is on the basis there's code compliant on that motion to uphold with that condition and that basis commissioner fong commissioner honda commissioner wilson thank you. the vote is 4 to zero those 3 permits are upheld on this basis and that condition thank you. >> thank you moving on to to item 5 appeal

thomas versus the department of public works at 2120th street the continuance to 20th street of an alternatives from 6 to 8 feet by excavating down and replacing the slab that matter was heard on november 12th and continued for the dpw and permit holder to conduct a site survey and commissioner president lazarus if you want to give each party 3 minutes would you like to hear if the department farsz actual the permit holder approached me their attorney has not arrived they ask the board to call another case. >> okay so we'll put that off and if you see that person arrive. >> there's a flagger. >> flagger

(laughter). >> i'll call the next item appeal that's jason versus the department of building inspection with the planning department approval on commercial street protesting the ordinances to charity center of an alternatives to add stairs between the locations and provide the accessibility to 731 commercial street new doors to include the - this was heard and continued to allow time for dpw dbi to look at the ada requirement i believe this is not correct the appellant is here if you want to step forward i believe there's discussion of a possible request for continuance; is that correct i see mr. duffy is - arrest

okay. we'll hear if the inspector than. >> good evening joe duh from dbi on this case it's probably better to continue it i got out there last week, i had a look at the condition the issue with the front come but a consideration by the inspector in 2013 it had to do more with the change if level that was not shown correctly on the plans between the tenant spaces now the tenant spaces are joined bus of the helen commercial street insides the tenant space one of them is higher than the other that's the defective property it was shown as a door they needed to picking up put in steps so they were told to get a provision permit

and as part of the provision project we know that the door got included we know that's a historic building probably something needs to be done about the door that didn't require the doors to be replaced i had a conversation with the architect he's confident to get a revision that display need the doors to be revised so the people that are have the building are quite happy to do that with with that said we need more time to figure out this and get away from touching the front of the building because of the historic nature of the doors so that's where we are at this time. >> so you suggest a timetable mr. duffy. >> it will probably take a month or two there's a lot of permits geological going over

the last three or four years we want to clean them up and get the work signed off to make it a little bit easier to move forward about this as well the issue is going to be the accessibility versus the historic nature of the front doors if we can deal with the permit for the interior work mayor ed lee we need not need the permit under appeal f that can get cancelled you will see me back but not the party donate the best case scenario. >> march 18 or 25. >> that's okay. >> i'm going back the architect and myself will be meeting in the next week about the old permits that should give us time and we can - he actually has plans ready to go if in that will address he had interior work you may see a cancelation

of the permit before that if you want to leave it off until march it maybe renewed by then. >> maybe the 25. >> mr. duffy perhaps if the work is not going to be required for the exterior doors novice the appellant and 0 if the permit is cancelled novice them and everybody b will stay informed. >> both sides are good it is just we've got to clean it up that's all. >> thank you. >> okay. so, sir anything you want to add is there anyone here for the permit holder okay any public comment? okay commissioners the matter is yours then >> move to continue this to

march 25th. >> okay mr. pacheco. >> we have a motion from commissioner fung to continue this to march 25th on that motion commissioner president lazarus commissioner honda commissioner wilson thank you vote is 4 to zero that matter is continued to march 25th no additional briefing correct no additional briefing thank you. >> commissioners i was handed a withdrawal for the last item number 9 appeal on our calendar on 2778 that matter will not be heard this meeting i wanted to announce that if there's anyone

else. >> we're not back to number 5 but number 7 henry versus the department of building inspection with the planning department approval the properties on 147 hahn street protesting the issuance to plague go to an alteration to replace old garage door with new garage door and the demolition of the rooms and replacing a structure at the back you'll hear from the appellant or his representatives. >> i'm dennis i do represent henry could you stand so they can see you herpes this problem arose from a counter permit that was issued for the demolition of the unit for where he's been living mr.

go is 58 year-olds and disabled and in preparing the brief you have before you as well as the in preparing for the hearing tonight i was preschoolsed in order to comply with state law dbi would have taken some steps so i went back through the papers again and you already have a request for judicial notice that includes h the application for the building permit and what i found to be of interest was the answer to question no. 24

it asked there does this alteration alteration does that alteration institute a change of occupancy and the answer is no well, the reason why that's peculiar is because if you demolish the illegal unit naturally you'll think it would change the occupancy yet dbi was mislead that maybe why we have not seen a former overlook opposition to this appeal and i have not seen mr. clay go here to know if he'll appear but to me it seems like an important question if the beginning is relying on this information and the information is false then that could in fact explain why

certain considerations were noting not made and any theory was that actually your last case was cited in my brief is new from june codify 2014 i release that sometimes the court makes a ruling did not mean that everyone is caught up this is really the procedures voluntary to change to reflect the changes in the law as handicapped down by the court you, however in view of that document it seems like dbi didn't have the correct information in my case to deapprove mr. herpes of his occupant without notice and as a result of misleading dbi would be grossly unfair to both him

and the public one of the things we cherish in this country is our home it was a place and shelter no one wants to see low income and disabled people and elderly go homeless it's a terrible thing to see i've cited state statutes pointing out that is the state policy to preserve such housing i think outside the box given the circumstances here revocation of the permit is the appropriate recommend one should not benefit by lying to public entities and one shouldn't benefit the lymph gland has benefited by accepting represent when there's no certificate of occupancy and is shown by the

90s notices of violation ply client lives in slum like companies that by itself is wrong, however the situation has not been corrected my client should have a chance to set of the whether reasonable repairs can reasonably be made to the unit that allows him to stay there if you have questions i'll be more than willing to answer them. >> thank you very much. >> thank you we can hear if the permit holder is there someone representing the permit holder. >> okay. we can hear from the departments then.

>> commissioners joe duffey dbi the permit under appeal was obtained to comply with two notices of violation to the addresses replace 3 windows at rear and replace old garage door and get a permit for demolition of the illegal rooms and build inside the garage level and replace 3 windows the permit is a form 8 over the permit it was filed on the 11th of june 2012, 2013 and issued i'm going owe a of i'm sorry the 6th of august the permit was route through the

appropriate stations when it was presented to dbi went through housing inspectors to issue the notice of violation and routed through city mapping and mechanic plan check with the bureau the notices of violation here the one i think that addresses the illegal dwelling units was orientated following a complaint received by dbi in february of 2014 the 18th of february 126s assigned to our housing inspectors services and throughout february and between february and august there was an investigation of the complaints the basis of complaint was the illegal basement level and

multiple rooms built ups and illegal use and not investigated there's actually work without permit of rear yard and the dbi complaint so the result of the investigation was the issuance of the notice of violation i'm going to read out the body i know that will be helpful this is an r there 3 unit living over the garage basement the garage door has been fixed an unapproved room and roof that hangs over the property lines and a new unapproved wall and several new windows have been installed the stairs at the rear yard don't have a rail and the first rail is made of wood along the stair and electrical throughout the ground floor and

the exterior there's an unproved exhaust at the rear wall and a deadbolt is a egress of bluks the instructions to the owner the property will be to submit a copy of the notice of violation on two sets of plans with the building plan obligation to legalize the floor plan or reverse call for a periodic electrical plumbing and inspections all permits must be signed off by the replaced inspections and you must contact inspections services and produce all permits when the appropriate sign offices as required that is a notice of violation

issued by the housing inspectors services that was taken out to comply with the notice of violation so it's pretty clear a illegal construction on the ground floor the permit was - they choose to remove the construction and revert it back to a garage just on one of the issues that the previous gentleman spoke i think the attorney mentioned the change of occupancy there's no change of occupancy it's a single-family dwelling and the occupancy is an example r-3 it would be an rh2 to an r there 3 the permit application was

filled out credulous no change the occupancy that's a false statement so if issue i can explain it to the attorney if he needs it the building code is highlighted as a single-family dwelling that's the proper occupancy i'm available for any questions. >> i'm confused how those permits that are the ones being challenged work to correct the violations. >> uh-huh. >> what you added made it sound like all sorts i have things downey done to make this unit replacing the garage doors and goosh the room insides the garage so that - >> their legal listing the windows but taking out the illegal unit that is the issue. >> right in the middle i was

looking at the work that was not completely. >> someone is losing their room on the ground floor. >> i have several questions was advertise an unanimous complaint. >> no, no the complainant was henry san francisco and there's a phone number i'm not read by from someone living in the building. >> has the inspector visited the site. >> we visited to have the notice of violation and the upstairs two. >> i assume so the main building the proper the living consumption is on the second floor. >> is he in the downstairs. >> yes. i believe that's all the work it only through the

ground floor. >> okay any additional work to the main level on the second floor. >> not that i know of they've gotten a permit that complaint needs to be closed i should read out the other notice of violation the permit does refer to two notices of violation some of the work on - some of those things on o that notice of violation more like an electrical or plumbing permit if you want i can read out this notion of violation let me if you'll just i can look at it, it's merely the ground floor from what i'm serging the

ventilation and the garage that's all ground floor stuff. >> okay. thank you is there a safety issue here. >> well, i that the fact that the inspector did mention unapproved wiring all the work without a permit that in and of itself is a safety issue but an imminent immensity we like to use the word but if someone is living there oneself you cannot or can't tell with the electrical it was done without a permit that work they've chosen to take it out we'll spicket it but safety i imagine is all depended on what we mean by safety, you know what i mean someone has been living there and nothing has happened but if you use the word safety and code

is the word. >> i don't know. i'm not sure obviously the unit has existed over a period of time how long they didn't say. >> it's a landlord tenant dispute obviously so common situation here on a san francisco. >> absolutely the appellants brief is brought up an issue of who can apply for a permit if the ownership is not a single entity. >> if the ownership is sorry. >> a single person or bit. >> uh-huh. >> the records indicate two owners but one side is that acceptable to the department. >> i don't know the answer to that question the owner if it's a single-family dwelling it usually i don't know that is a good question i've not been asked that before and condos are different a little bit

condominiums we're talking about that and we the owners do both owners need to sign for the permit i don't know the answer to that question you know but that's one i'm not sure about. >> that would be something else our central permit bureau and right before the issuance that part of the application that has who signs and the workers' compensation information and insurance all that stuff i'm it's not something else i tale with but i can certainly get back to you if this is the important. >> i maybe if you look at the permit you can't tell who is signing what. >> you'll need documents if you're an owner a general contractor can do that they've got that right but the owner has

to prove they're the owner i'm you could be the agent and working on behalf of the owner maybe they have a document with them i don't have the details how the permits get issued and give the authorization to obtain a permit. >> okay. >> okay. is any public comment on this item? oh sanchez. >> good evening scott sanchez planning department it's within rh1 that allows the maximum of a single-family dwelling the based the records of the senior mr. duffy notified the legal use is a single-family dwelling i note that the planning code section that was donated there may be a pass forward to legalize it if

certain conditions were met but not fwru i want to restate the mayors derivative that didn't apply to this building where a discretionary review and the planning department reviewed the permit and said it is issued appropriately and calling for public comment seeing none rebuttal, sir. >> thank you the position taken by deploying is of concern to me because of point raised on page 5 of any brief right at the bottom it talks footnote