board. >> thank you sorry i'm trying to get organized i want to give you a brief summary i was worried about a notice of violation in october and as soon as i got the notice of violation i went to dbi 8 times gathering the necessary information and trying to figure out you know what to do in february i got the necessary approvals to get the permit i also i haven't paid it because as you can see from the is it correct to the last page appealings it is a financial hardship for me and also i would

i guests mayor of the building code i'm claiming governance that's not an excuse i'm a regular person trying to clear my violations i mean i did not know i was doing anything wrong once i got the notice of violation i went to dbi to get the information and here we or so what i'm trying to ask is that for the board to reduce my penalties if times to 2 times i don't feel i should be penalized i'm doing the best i can bottom line i'd like to move forward i'm asking for reduction in penalty thank you. >> i have a couple of questions

how long have you owned the property. >> well my apartment and i own the property i'm thinking maybe at least 15 years. >> so and do you live on the property. >> i recently moved back in late 2012, 2013. >> so when was the work in question done. >> well, part of work was done in i believe it was 2014 and i did minor remodeling of the kitchen and bathroom on the two story and the other work i believe in 2000 and that was done by my parents. >> when you do the work who performed the work for you a contractor friend and contractor. >> and he didn't at this time

inform you a permit was needed to do such remodeling to the house. >> well, i don't know i really wasn't involved in 2000 okay. >> no more than because you were the one doing the 2014. >> i was responsible for the 2014 work, yes. >> i don't think he mentioned it i know i didn't ask i would familiar with. >> i understand thank you. >> i mean, now i know basically i have to - >> i mean, you need permission from dbi for everything in the process so - >> yep thank you. i think the department will clear up the other questions i have. >> i have one question on the questionnaire do you own other property in san francisco you said, yes. >> i have a property on 30th

and noreaga. >> have i done remodeling of that property. >> minor. >> nothing to this extent. >> no. nothing that required a permit. >> no. >> thank you. >> next mr. duffy. >> commissioners joe duffy dbi again, this the building permit that did penalty on to comply with the second-story the kitchen counter top and slour are and remove the stove and board up that windows and the second permit is not contrary

i'm not sure we had a notice of violation issued by the district inspector that was a result of a claimed on the 20th of july 2014 the complaint was actually for no permit for bathroom work for several weeks we got a second complaint an july 9th for bathroom and kitchen and complainant called on july 20th and we have a phone number for a person but we got in there and the inspector steve actually wrote a notice of violation on the 23rd of october size investigation for those two illegal dwelling units one with two windows that open directly into the garage and remodeling work was noted in the garage and laundry area exhaust duct and

electrical on dprr ground floor and he said foiled a building permit to have one within 60 days and complete all work between 90 days the permit was a filed permit during the process of getting the building permit the permit it was issued for 90 thousand dollars a penalty by the inspector in october so that normally 9 times fee he valued the work at 40 thousand dollars so the penalty is in the region of 3 thousand 5 hundred and 83 plus cents the total fees are 6 thousand dollars plus it is about 50 percent of the

permit fees and it is a high penalty it is for work done without a permit i'm not sure if the permit holder exhausted the penalties sometimes if someone comes in and says it's not 40 thousand but 20 thousand your penalty is too high that's dealt with by the senior citizen chief building inspector or a deputy director it looks like the penalty was put on properly but it is a high penalty but it is that's what the codes tells us to do i'll be happy to answer any questions if you have any. >> go ahead. >> mr. duffy how many unit you said on the ground floor. >> the notice of violation we had that revealed to illegal

dwelling units there's a main level and two illegal ground floor units. >> let's see here yeah. one dwelling and single that's what the notice of violation reads i've not been to the site that's what the inspector is alleging i imagine we got a complaint of the remodeling of the kitchen the legal part of house and the inspector went there and i guess he saw the illegal dwelling units he knows this is a single-family and wrote up the work with the main floor garage level are included in this notice of violation. >> yes. yes and and probably came with the 40 thousand penalty and built without a permit i saw a permit in the 8

that adds storage room and basement completed in 1990 the area we're talking about that may have been converted to the illegal dwelling units so maybe the property owner can tells you what's going on this sometimes is you know probably plumbing put in the building and stuff like this so that may have been the conversion plus the work done on the second-story so it can add up penalties add up you go into you know in the scheme of things it can be excessive we do tell me the inspectors not to go like $300,000 or something be you know do your job and make sure you look at it and be fair what the penalty be fair it is

expensive so that's the up to the present time without a permit. >> so one of the issues even with the legislation that is passed with two unit only one is potentially going to be legalized i guess mr. sanchez. >> yeah. i'm not sure they won't do that nicole i haven't seen the drawings it sounds like they're adding a storage room and reentered they're taking out whatever the second illegal unit is not calory on the permit they're saying maybe disagreeably with the destruction guess so if that's the kinds maybe a senior inspector could verify the violation is accurate but certainly removing one the illegal unit. >> we'll get clarification. >> there's no permit for

localtion those ground floor rooms are there but not dwelling units under this permit they could though mr. sanchez. >> okay. thank you. >> definitely if i can clarify you received an nov i mean a climate issued a nova based on the work being done without a permit. >> yes. >> i understand has nothing to do with 80 with the illegal units. >> that's what it reads like. >> we need clarification. >> the illegal unit were there and the inspector sees a single-family and would the nov be and then to include. >> he knew we he feels going to a single-family and during the inspection any of us seen the illegal unit. >> i'm unclear whether those illegal opted are coming out or

not. >> i think they are. >> but that is not what the original permit was for . >> i think there is language. >> and work without a permit i think - >> request you or if you put in an illegal unit this is work without a permit he covered everything on the violation but remove the stove and add storage room and there is work going on in two unit it is taking out the cooking facilities this is enough to remove the illegal unit. >> one last question so the complaint was from the tenant or - >> i think it was sounds like a tenant yes. >> the address of the complainant was the same address on the property. >> yeah. thank you.

>> okay any public comment on this item? seeing none, none ms. wow. the board members have questions and you have 3 minutes of rebuttal if you have anything else to say. >> i don't want to say other than the fact. >> can you talk into the micro. >> i was originally cited for not getting a permit for my remodeling on the second-story and in the process the inspector found two illegal units in the basement since that time one of the tenants moved out the person that complained so for that unit i'm requesting to stack out the bathroom which would then convert the unit back to a storage room that was originally approved i think in 1998

anticipate for the second unit we got a permit for basement improvements i think not we but the previous owners got an approved permit for beement improvements that was in 1990 i believe and so we're asking to i guess take out the kitchen in the second unit so that it can be legal does that make sense. >> what was the scope of your original work upgrades on the original unit. >> in the swoop i did remodeling on the second-story to my kitchen and bathroom beacon hill changing the inhabitants and the countertops and changing the van it in the

bathroom and changing the tiles i admit i didn't get a permit i don't know. >> so then the tenant or a tenant in the illegal unit foiled a complaint and that led to the discovery of two illegal units. >> yes. so this is where i'm confused have you requested a permit to do this other work to get rid of the unit. >> yes. i have all the necessary approvals to i'm asking for retroactive approval for the bathroom other than the second-story and take out the kitchen and bathroom downstairs. >> so basically, all under one permit you had to deal with our remodeling. >> yes. i'm trying to clear the notice of violation and anything the only thing holding it up i guess is paying for the

permit and the fees and the penalties. >> i have several questions so are you you know that you are allowed to legalize a downstairs unit is that your intention or remove. >> no, not my intention i went down to dbi any intention was to legalize one you are talking about it is too much to go through i was handed a 20 page document with numerous things i had to do in order to legalize it was too much for me when i called the tax assessor's office what's the ramifications if i converted a unit legally they couldn't answer me because it's a new program i think i did not feel comfortable without firmer

answers. >> the second question who is doing this work the same contractor that did that originally. >> i'm hoping to get a contractor that - well price is a consideration i don't know at this point i'm not sure i'm still doing research and i definitely recommend a licensed contractor did second time. >> thank you. >> okay. >> inspector duffey anything else. >> commissioners just a thought may help is the i'm not sure the construction the lady was at whenever the building inspector came in but if so wall permit was actively a legal permit but the stove maybe they added a

bathroom i'm trying to say if i was working at the beginning and someone talked to me and sat down and figured out you may end up with $20,000 so maybe you guys go to 5 times it probably will be lower at dbi i wasn't part of this discussion i'm not sure if she appealed that but we possibility wasn't aware of the penalty and my prove it was adding a kitchen combats norman not a lot of cabinets yet e yes sir. it was done without a permit but that's only the value of the work at the time all we're supposed to put on that

the other thing if she's permitted shows have the expense of opening up the walls for the plumbing and other inspectors so there's penalties and then there's costs associated without a permit in addition to our penalties. >> i'm making sense and trying to brings some reason. >> if the romance were done without a permit in 9989 a secondary debilitation that usually indicated any rooms were for storage not for habitable space so when you purchase the property and on the disclosure. >> i thought i'd say b that part about the penalty. >> okay. thank you. >> commissioners the matter is

submitted. >> i will be willing to cut it in half there were two ma many laws and income generated normally we have typically gone down to due times but i'll cut it in half. >> four and a half or 5. >> your choice madam president. >> 4. >> okay 4. >> yep to what is that to - >> grant the appeal and grant the appeal and. >> to reduce the penalty to 4 times rather than 9 times on the basis that oh, god what's the basis? what would the basis be >> the base of the

recommendation that the department of building inspection decide there's reason for cause that the amount of the construction was overstated by the inspector. >> thank you there's a motion on the floor from the vice president to reduce the penalty from 9 times to 4 times the regular foe on the basis of the recommendation of the department of building inspection. >> let's put in the motion specifically that the cost of the construction was overstated. >> the basis that the cost of construction was overstated. >> on that motion to reduce commissioner fung is absent commissioner president lazarus commissioner wilson commissioner swig. >> thank you the vote is 4 to zero the penalty is reduced to 4 times on that basis as so item 9

is withdrawn and item 10 alfonso trustees versus the zoning administrator on cesar chavez street appealing the ownerships of a request are for a verification asking the department of building inspection revoke the application because the planning department buildings this permit was issued in error we'll start with the appellant. >> good evening, commissioners my name is what alfonso the

trite for the owner of the property cesar chavez i'm appealing the rest indication of the permit i have a statement to read as basically what are the negative consequences to the department that issued the permit without notifying the owner no one the record shows the appellant was never denied 92 due process and the department of building inspection and ultimately lost the procedural the minor preschool political error was caused by the department and the permit holder are the ones surviving u suffering from the error by revoking the permit it appears the permit was never issued and the permit holder is to start the process over per mr. sanchez statement he want to

move forward, however he's asking the permit holder to move background not to mention the time and money attorney fees let's stop dragging this out and diverse the permit this permit was issued contributory negligence correctly and all that was not the permit holders fault there were no negative consequences to the b b m holder they have their day in the city system and continued to live in the space any questions that is. >> thank you that's for now thank you. >> mr. sanchez.

>> thank you scott sanchez planning department regret fully this operate pass a long history the b b m requester asked for the permit to be sought regretting south didn't honor the notice when the b b m permit was noticed we suspended the process with the b b m that provides a right for the holder to take the item as a discretionary review request to the planning commission they sought the discretionary review request and the building department did understand this permit had the b b n not been missed it would have been brought to a appeal of a denial of the permitting permit and the votes to overturn that would

have required 4 votes to overturn that decision we taught u sought to have this matter addressed earlier this year and didn't succeed so we are seeking this revocation request to go and have this priority not properly issued revoked to go through the proper process to honor the department of building inspection to deny the permit as a appeal of a denial of a permit so i appreciate this has a long history somewhat complicated been to you second time and i appreciate the commissioners reviewing those material in our request we tried to all the history and the justifications for seeking the rest indication issued in error without the appropriate decision on the

permit it never should have been approved it should have been denied and we respectfully request you uphold the request and deny the permit i'll be happy to answer any questions. >> we'll take any public comment on that item? >> hello i'm norma i'm a friend of the deceased i apologize. i have a headache so a very bad one i guess this is a good one it is an elderly handicapped property owner that device in july of 2013. >> sorry to interrupt you, you're not part of trust; right? >> i know the deceased property owner her at this point denying a

permit in which did deceased property owner and the trustee are waiting to sell this property and settled the here's the hearings are not here and going through the process to a new permit means we go through this process again, this is going on for over a year the bpm detailed the process saying she noted to prepare she didn't show up for the hearing and that was two hearings that were detailed planning department did say in their discretionary review it states here that this specific dwelling it is two units it didn't quality for the mayors

directive which is in regards to 3 units yet the board i guess the discretionary review had referenced that they were denying this because it is part ever mayors derivative for 3 unit not the 2 units they had inspectors go out and seeing the two units the motor to the bottom unit is the same to the cottage all of this delay is accruing this trust to just sit there due to clerical error that appears the permit was issued correctly as you stated by the planning department to approve the project as it is proposed property owner died and the estate is being handled is it so not going to be legalized he's a twitter we're holding into the

process and spend more and more money out of a trust at this point there are hearings if they die they get nothing at this point it is going on for years they'll tried to do a settlement with ms. miller she's denied the settlement there is no money except for the sale of the property shows comment was there is not enough it seems like it is all about the money and pushing this through it is going on for 4 years so we're hoping you'll find it to approve the permit and not revoke it at this point and to continue it for a non-exist owner to allow the trust. >> i'm sorry your time is up. >> thank