abated or asked to produce the building permit looking at the initial stage of complaints and the citations it is really confusing so my first question is this the owner of property on the backside. >> this is purely on a jurisdictional so save our merits for that. >> sorry. >> one of the case is it pertains to a different citations which the actual storage house and then the flooring is this thing from what of the being card charges on the 16 dot 1 the foundation has a

different permit and the next one the storage shed has to have the next permit. >> excuse me. sir they have to decide on the jurisdiction then you'll make your case. >> is there any further commissioners comments before we go to public comment any public comment seeing none if you want to. >> you go. >> your turn. >> you go. >> i'd like to make a motion based on the fact that the building permit was foiled we uphold we not uphold. >> we grant jurisdiction or take jurisdiction i would suggest we continue it. >> to another time. >> to another time to give the

staff time to prepare the case and resolve the illness kinds. >> can i request the next paycheck if you could provides the drawings for the shared foundation. >> absolutely we have drawings and photos and all the fun stuff. >> we'll be cognizant of trying to defend it is sound it is going to complicated where the foundation is. >> let's not deal. >> i'd like to reiterate what you're heard the department staff say multiplements times over today what is issues are civil issues that are decided between neighbors. >> there's a jurisdictional hearing. >> right part of why i'm here is because the department staff has made that an issue between the

department and letting the neighbors figure out it themselves. >> you've made a motion; right? >> second. >> i'm going to restate the motion the motion to grant jurisdiction and continue the matter until the next month to month. >> on that motion i'll do a roll call vote vote. >> commissioner clinch commissioner melgar commissioner mccarthy commissioner mccray commissioner walker okay. that motion carries unanimously you didn't call me. >> yes. >> (laughter) yes. >> item 8 general public comment is there any general public comment for items no one the the abatement appeals item i adjournment. >> is there a motion to adjourn. >> second. >> we're now adjourned it is

11167 a.m. and we'll reconvene as the building inspection in ready to begin good morning today is wednesday april 15, 2015, this is the regular meeting of building inspection commission i'd like to remind everyone to turn off electronic devises the first, it roll call vote commissioner president mccarthy commissioner vice president mar

commissioner clinch commissioner mccray commissioner melgar and commissioner walker commissioner lee is excused. >> in the interest of time i'll move the directors announcements but unfortunately, that are people from both all sides but in interest of that i'll maybe in i have time to do at the end of the month to month the directors announcements go straight to public comment. >> item 3 general public comment we'll take matters not part of agenda. >> are you speaking on an agenda item. >> good morning, commissioners my name is shirley moore with the health alliance in the neighborhood association and

this candle stick appointment committee first of all i want to thank the president commissioner the president of the commission the last time we were here regarding the candle stick demolition brothers we have a meeting with the air quality management and the community to sit down and discuss discussions about issues that were brought before the commission i want to thank you for facilitating that meeting well cohen that meeting that was fascinated by i did department of building inspection police car lourey we had 3 meetings with since then and had subsequent meeting regarding the issues at candle stick stadium.

>> the don't guess we managed to come to numbers of agreements and speak with a collaborative voice and address issues that concerned the community mainly the dust and the dust plan many things were promised in the month to month but we i guess if you have been delivered because of time issues i have a conflict with a meeting scheduled i was due out of here at 11:30 to drove thomas will elaborate on the meeting and it's consultants out of meeting we signed our collaborative voice and speaking that the developer and ocii and the agency city's are air

quality management and the department of public health and positive manner and obey horde our issues are being aided i'm hoping going forward we can speak many a collective voice and heard by each other and be productivity going forward i thank you, very much. >> thank you. any additional general public comment for items not on the agenda? okay. seeing none item 4 >> is this on the agenda? okay >> my name is yolanda louis on behalf of human right black coalition i want to make the everyone aware 2015 marks the first year for people of african

descent declared by the you understand we must remember that people of african descent are effected by racism too often they are denied human rights for quality health insurance and education the united nations secretary general san francisco is a city notorious for having elected leaders that falsifies people in high places and violations take place against black people the city are the likes of dogs are given greater value than amending citizens we have a right to clean air and right to eclipse water, right? to live in an environment free of told his but the dred scott kinds remind us when the chief

said the people have not the rights a black man has no rights that a white man it to respect there was a case that in overturn that but they say the 13 meantime it says that slavery has been mreementd and we know that san francisco has a crime rate of incarcerated black people at a rate higher than the apartheid san francisco is known for racism against black people i want to say that that is human right should trump money and human rights should trump the agenda we should stop abusing and overlooking the network for those you consider less than

human they've been declared i want to say that and come to you to look at the human side as human beings we're not less than dogs. >> general public comment. >> seeing none item 4 employee of the quarter winner for quarter one 2015. >> item 4 employee of the quarter winner although actually this was as opposed to be a part of presidents announcements that has gone to the records management division and although supervisor patty who nominated that is not with us today julie and another member is here as the quarter one of 2015 to

announce it following are the names of all the records staff that are refgs this joint award alex benny, caramel christina and others (calling names) so joining those and daren are alex benny and others come forward to receive our certificate and thanks to all the records staff important providing the outstanding customer service.

>> commissioner mar i want to say on behalf of committee and the commission that was difficult go to make that decision it is rare to give an award to an entire department the records division is management division is group that is unrecognized you work in the back you've made great strides in helping us making the customers much more happier getting the records in a timely manner with that i'm bring down the whole board

(clapping) thank you all and congratulations again. >> we're on to item 5 appeals pursuant to the section of the city charter appeal by a representative of freeman regarding the property on gerrero street and the directors decision to revoke the final decision of occupancy speak up. >> okay. are we on. >> yes. >> the order of - and dbi

present it's presentation first then the opponent. >> indemnify staff. >> good morning patrick chief building inspector with the building inspection just to refresh you all i'll go through the presentation and have updates to add property is 1142 gerrero so the permit application 2014112014 pardon me 0611 was issued over the credit with no drawings and no planning review it was described as an

administrative permit for the purpose of documenting the use of rear building as a single-family cf c certificate of final completion was issued in 2014 substantially a complaint number 201493251 was foiled on september 5th contending that was issued based on erroneous information like the storage shed was convert to a single-family home unit a notice of violation was issued on september 14th the owners representatives was given several weeks to the dbi archives for a permit to document it conversion of the

building a letter issued by dbi on december 19th revoking the erroneously permit permit applications from 2002 and subsequent 2013 permit were signed off 2003 pardon me and those permits refer to water damage repair and indicated the building was a single-family use o those permits with in fact signed off and an appeal was filed at the board of appeals regarding this matter also just so you know it was continued based on a decision that may not be render by the commission here today so city planning has also

indicated that it would be willing to consider the legalization of this unit permit application that could be filed to do see based on the mayors derivative for those types of units to be legalized code enforcement activity has been suspended based on those hearings we're to the moving on that pending potential decision by this board of appeals. >> permit application 201406 would one one 838 was issued the associated cf c was issued in error the garden shed was not converted to a legal dwelling unit and drawings should are

occupied the application, and the planning department should also have approved that same application an erroneous 3 r report was issued on april 5, 905 shows the unauthorized use as a one family dwelling that report is now inspire the it is important to said that report was generated based on the permit that was filed showing the building to be single-family for the water damage repair in 2002 so in regard updates i asked do records management division to conduct a thorough search of the

records that was conducted by a different individual that searched for than the one that searched for the first records two visits were made to the site by administrative review and the rear building in honest it is a nice little building and reasonably code compliant that are a few things to be fixed captured as a subsequent inspection it is reasonable code compliant for the most part the careers records show two unit for the property that's probably important to understand that and also the building is served by a separate central service which was in fact illegal permit back in the era of 903 i have the permit

here if you want to see the electrical service there's no gas service to the rear building heat is provided two the electrical there is an electrical water heater there's no gas and the water service i took pictures of the water service to the building and the building inspector indicated everything looked like it was code compliant from a plumbing prospective and talked to the chief electrical inspector and from the firs didn't see major code violations in regards to the electrical work at the property so - i think it is one thing it is it struck me in reading the submittal package over again, was there is a court document

where shall the previous owner mr. perish made a statement he had in fact converted the restore building from a garden shed to a dwelling so we have no evidence of such a permit for the conversion from garden shed to a dwelling unit we did do two exhaust searchers and came up with nothing and generally speaking we like to see a permit to document those conversions we don't have one nicole as well as i have to say i have some pictures you want to see on the overhead of the building.

>> >> i have a question. >> let me just turn it the outlet way. >> a clarification the careers office records katsz two unit not 3 unit in the front building. >> it shows 2 units for the property. >> both in the front correct. >> i guess we're not spitting the ones in the front it shows 2 units in the front of the building. >> all right. and this is the property here at the restore of the lot and that is inside the unit there's a kitchen right there

those are the two gas meters associated with the front building having no gas at the rear of the building i had mention there were 3 electrical meters those are the 3 electrical meters one is legally permitted for the service this is the single water service of the building so this one service is supplying 3 unit on the property and this is the electrical water heater mounted on the outside of the rear and . >> so that electric was

permitted electric. >> the electrical work for the building was in fact, signed off and . >> it was commercial or - >> it was done on the permit that was labeled dwelling unit back in 2002 era it didn't have plans associated with that and so forth. >> we can see we have the required bathing facilitates and sanitation fats required per the code and this is the street facade of the front building so as you can see it is a beautiful old

building so i think one more thing we find interesting this is the is an born for the building right here so san born maps are reliable as you can see it shows the oil of the front building you know we don't see anything in the back so - >> except the yellow blotch. >> that was me i'm sorry (laughter). >> do you have any questns commissioners? so >> just a quick question if the photographs that cottage is occupied. >> it appears so when i was in there i didn't see anybody there attachment it was looks like it was being lived in. >> so why don't we if there's not more questions for mr.

reardon thank you for your presentation i really appreciate it. >> good morning commissioners as the hearing started i was informed that the property owner and the tenant of that unit have reached an agreement hopefully changes the tone of the hearing and hopefully effects the outcome of the case we're here because the tenant who we reached on agreement with stated a grinds to the department of building inspection regarding the issuance of a certificate of final completion of occupancy that tenant agrees that the certificate should be reinstated

as part ever settlement and in fact, the settlement is on that it's your decision we've met the requirement forrun establishment my client purchased that property more than 10 years ago in resigns on a 3 r report and for 10 years rent out this unit believing the unit was a lawful dwelling unit the assessor of records that have been indicate show and stated on accessories website dwnld are are in-law units on the ground floor the

listing of space is urban warden indicating the legality is not justified only the associated 3 r report if the case of dwells is evidence for legality there's no question my client had has nothing to do with with the permit process that letting led to the issuance of the 3 r report or relied on the 3 r report the price he paid was for a 3 unit property it's been accessed irrespective of the record as a 2 unit u unit property given that the person that stated the original grierns with the final completion is presented to withdraw that grierns given it will be resolved by the certificate of completion we believe it is appropriate that the board run

state the certificate i don't know. i don't want to restate it we have our - i think the parties have resolved their dividends we ask you to look at that agreement consistent that the policies the city has of reverseably the unit we need to do something to prepare we are - we put it in our hands to do the right thing and effect wait the agreement i'll be happy to answer any questions. >> we'll probably have some never a dull moment i'll be interested in hearing from all parties particularly with the