description which i think will fit better than what we had before. and the plans do reflect the fourth floor level as an existing attic going to be converted to livable space. and i just, for the record, just readout the project description. remodel of single-family residence including new kitchen, plumbing, electrical mechanical and structural work, new work on front

an 11 copies tonight, so he -- or the attorney for the project, so i think he brought 11 copies for you. they weren't submitted. we just mapped them at dbi. >> okay. >> so you might want to hear from the -- >> well, we'll hear from both parties. >> should we here from teague first, if the department is done? nothing? okay. so we can hear, then, from the

appellant. >> president fung and commissioners, i'm very glad to hear the report from senior planner inspector duffy, and i'm very happy to hear that sprinklers will be able to put in so it will be a legal dwelling right next to me, connected, so there will not be a fear of fire hazard. i do want to request that we work out a agreement just because i have a new roof on their side. every roofer that came up to give me estimates told me that their roof needed to be replaced years ago. so even if they don't do it now, it's going to need to be done. i've given them cancelled checks, and i've told them we need to have things in place done, because if they make my roof leak, they're going to

hear about it. this is not asking a lot. i'm not asking them to soundproof to condo level or put down lights or that type of thing, but it's just something to make it as a neighborly agreement that if there's damage done to our roof because we are connected, that i'd like to have them pay for the expense, and that's all i ask. thank you. >> thank you. >> okay. we can hear from the permit holder now.

>> it's not whether we like to do it. if you want us to adopt it, you better submit it. >> i would like to. >> please hand them to the clerk. >> thank you. >> thank you. >> you want one? >> thank you. okay. why don't you state your name and proceed. >> good evening, president, vice president, commissioners. my name is steven hammond of clark hill llp on behalf of

respondents car why a respondents care w respondents carrie and ryan baker. the issue here was the appellant, miss momota, brought up at the last hearing, that the plans improper omitted the requirement to install a sprinkler system. vice president swig was particularly concerned because there was an e-mail from miss baker, the project owner, saying that the -- one would be installed. all this was news to me because in the apartment papers, the issues was a dutch cutter that miss momota had affixed to her property and attached to the project owner's property. the board continued the hearing, and at that time, we looked into this issue of the sprinkler system requirement, and what we discovered is that the as approved plans -- and you now have with you the first

two pages. one is -- the first is a blowup, which i also have here on the overhead. and the second is the full page of this blowup. and what it shows asti conditi of approval is a requirement to sprinkle the entire building pernfpa 13-r under separate permit. so in fact that has always been a condition of approval, and -- and i'm now able to make and clarify that point to you. the -- as inspector duffy indicated, the architect did meet with him and submitted revised plans as requested that clarified the number of stories and also further memorialized the condition of approval that

there is to be an installation of a sprinkler system in the entire building. on that basis, we ask that you deny this p.o. or in the alternative, conditionally approve it with the appropriate permit. if -- i'm available if you have any questions, and as well as mr. hertzig. thank you. >> as a point of clarification, you're asking that the two sheets you submitted replace the corresponding sheets in your original set, and the balance of the set remains as is? >> that is -- that, i believe, is correct, but i want to make sure that -- [ inaudible ] >> so as mr. hertzig said, it

would be a permission revision? >> you want a permission revision? >> no. we want a permit tonight with the conditions that are indicated in the plans that we've just submitted or has been submitted to inspector duffy. >> you have something to say? >> commissioners, joe duffy, dbi. i think i did advise them that the special conditions permit was the option to get this cleared up. and just on the roof, there's no work on the appellant's side of the roof showing on the plans. the dormers are on the other side, so they shouldn't affect the roof. the basis of the

departmental review? >> yes. >> >> okay. so the president has made a motion to grant the appeal and issue the permit on the condition that it be revised to reflect the plan sheet submitted at the hearing on the

basis of the departmental review. on that motion. [ roll call. ] >> okay. thank you. that motion passes. >> okay. >> number 8 has been heard and decided, so we'll move to number 9, which is appeal number 18-003, louie ababian and headache hofsevyan, to erect three five story single-family type residents. >> hi. thank you for hearing us today, and thank you for pronouncing my name right. my name is lily abagian. we are living at 1106 3 avenue, which is directly behind the lot in question at 13 lucky

street. and the reason we're here today is to appeal the building permit for the garage that's going to be destroyed and the single-family dwelling that will be built at 13 lucky street. we don't oppose something being built there, but we really want our voices to be heard and have input into the building process because we're really concerned about our neighborhood, the fabric of the people in our neighborhood, the neighbors, the architectural integrity of our neighborhood, and the building process, as well as we're all in such close proximity. i'll start with just sharing a little bit about the neighborhood. i'm sure you know that the mission is a very vibrant district. it's one of the most heavily trafficked by tourists, and i think one of the most beautiful in the city. and we're right off of the calle 24 district, so this part of lucky butts right into 24th. the lucky alley is about a

block away from baume alley, which gets a lot of tourist traffic. it has a lot of beautiful murals, and lucky has a couple of beautiful murals, as well. i'll do a couple photos. so that's one view of it. that's right across the street from where the building would be. you know, some of the buildings are better preserved than others, but this is an example of some of the beautiful historic buildings that are on that street. what -- what our -- what the developer who like to build will be a much more modern looking home, and a home that he plans to build and then sell, so the reason we want our voices to be heard today is we know he doesn't actually have the plans to live there, and because we're going to be there, living near that building, we want to make sure that we have input into it. so i'll go over some of our specific concerns, but i would also like to acknowledge that

so far, for instance, a plan that he's submitted in 2013, he has made some alterations. he's modified the roof line and some other things. the brief that we submitted on february 15th, and his reply on march 1st, there's already a couple of things that he would like to consider. we would like this to be a friendly negotiation-conversation as much as possible. so our main concern -- or one of our concerns is with

because -- and we want to add color to that, pun intended, because the building will already be blocking a significant amount of light because of its proximity to the other buildings, and we hope that a lighter color will help mitigate that. and finally, the concerns i have are related to the building process in particular. so we ask these concerns be addressed while they're building the building, i want to confirm that our goal is not to hold up their process, but

to ensure that in the building process, the fence is built so that nobody can get in from the alley to 1104, as well as 1106 properties. we also made a request related to pests that may come up as they demolish their building. we want to clarify that if any pests leave their property and make it over to ours because everything is so close together, that they take care of that problem. and then, finally, we have concerns related to -- actually, two more things. so one was the use of the sidewalk. so 10 and 12 lucky street neighbors were quite distressed when the developer dismissed their ongoing need to use the sidewalk adjoining 13 lucky during demolition and construction, so we want to make sure that they behave in a neighborly way and don't block the sidewalk because it is a narrow alley during construction. and then our final request would be related to the hours of construction. obviously there's a lot of families, children, working

people in the area, so to begin at 7:00 a.m. with a lot of construction would be very disruptive, and we would hope that they not begin noise until at least 8:00 a.m., even if they need to arrive to the site sooner. so in conclusion, we would like the board to consider our requests to make this building blend into the fabric of the neighborhood, to not stick out like a sore thumb, especially given that the developer will not be living in it, so he won't be living in that building in front of him, and a couple of the other concerns related to the building process to make it as least disruptive at possible. thank you for listening. >> thank you. just a quick point. you saw in their brief their proposed color for the trespa panels. >> yeah, but they added a piece at the end that the final choice would be up to them. i don't know if that would -- that was slightly concerning, so i'm glad that they're

willing to work with us. we just want to make sure that we still have input to the final say. >> thank you. thank you. >> thank you. we can hear from the permit holder now. >> when we purchased the property in 2011, it had been deemed to not have historic significance. it has a two story one car garage currently on it that is in dilapidated condition. and when we started this process, we engaged the -- all the neighbors prior to that --

those dates required by 3-11. we had extensive conversations with the former tenants and owners at 1106, which are the two flats directly behind us. we had design features designed to minimize the impact on a three story home including sloping the roofing to the rear for drain i can't imagine, age about 2.5 feet lower in the rear. we offered to allow for a plant trellis on the north and rear side of our buildings so that they could have some greenery right now, whereas right now they're just looking at peeling paint, and we stayed well within the 2007 variance, which was before we owned the lot, which basically approved a

three story single-family home. that was all done according to the planning department process. and what we're proposing to building is what we consider to be a very warm, during resilient design. we specifically have called out exterior materials that don't require maintenance because that maintenance would have impact on the neighbors. and so the intent is basically once construction is over that the rear yard is actually deeded to the exclusive use of lily and her coowners above, and there really won't be any need for us to be on the property lines or putting up scaffold or anything, unlike pretty much any other building on lucky street. so we think that we're building a modern building. it's very energy efficient. that energy efficiency is going to make it extremely quiet. it's going to have full-time -- heat with full-time air exchange.

relative to the design that forms the conversation between the 2007 lot split, we removed a rear door to the rear yard, so apart from fire egress, there's no being access -- no regular access to the rear yard, and the rear yard is relatively expanded to what it was before. i'm going to show some pictures. sorry. i printed these in 11 by 17. this is our proposed design. we think it's very warm. the facade has a relief both in the windows and in the bezel that's in the second and third stories. that was in response to planning internal design review, which given that a lot of the old houses on the street had second story external entries, that we deemphasize the entry on the second floor. that's why the bezel is done in

a different material on the second and first floor. this is the rear. we've always drawn the adjacent property -- that's lily's rear deck to our second story bedroom. the rear windows are all privacy glass. the only ones that are operable are needed for ventilation or fire egress. several of them are fixed. there's a noncombustible fire transparency wall that lets light between two properties. i have some pictures of -- we fully respect that -- the victorian nature of the city and the alley. i've been a general contractor for 11 years and worked almost exclusively on older victorian buildings. a lot of these buildings are in very poor condition. poor paint. you can see that probably the original staircases that led up

to their second story entries are gone and they've been replaced by poorly constructed, heat treated -- >> why don't you pull the microphone over. >> oh . this building is across the street. this shows the typical condition of some of these old houses. peeling paint, nonhistoric aluminum, sliding windows, inconsistent design, poor maintenance. this is a new building that was built towards of the end of the block. it's new construction. we consider that our design has a lot more warmth and character and relief in the facade, but yeah, it's -- i don't know if this is [ inaudible ] protested. and then, the only other thing

i'd like to say is part of the appeal requested that we agree to pay for cleanings of the adjacent properties within a 100-foot radius. i would ask the owners of the houses who have attended this meeting if they would agree that every time they paint their house in the future, if they would agree to also clean every property within 100 feet? we don't think it's a reasonable request. other things such as building a fence at the rear to protect the properties behind us once the garage is gone, we agree to that. it's totally reasonable. we of course will maintain public access to the sidewalk. we reserve the right to use the portion of the sidewalk which is on our property, and of course, any sorts of pests that come up demolition, we, of course, will abate. and that's pretty much it. i'd also like to invite our neighbor on our south side,

larissa sand, who's at 19 lucky street to speak sfl okay. that would be under -- skbl under public comment? >> yeah. >> do you want to state your name for the record? >> sasha henchman. i'm coowner with jennifer smith. >> i have a question for you, sir. is there a reason why you didn't include plans into the packet? >> no. i mean, the plans, you know, we went through renewing the variance -- reviewing the 2007 variance, which is on the lot, we've gone through 311. i have the plans if people want to see them. >> i'm just wondering, because we are talking did detail on the project, that it would have make much more sense to put them in there. >> okay. all right. thank you. thank you. >> okay. thank you. mr. teague.

>> good evening, again, commissioners, cory teague for planning department staff. again, the subject property located at 13 lucky street, and it was created through a subdivision of a prior lot in 2007. that subdivision required and obtained a separate space. while the 2007 variance could not account for a new building that was not yet proposed, it did anticipate a new building on the 13 lucky street property and placed additional restrictions on that lot. in 2013, a new variance was obtained specifically for a new single-family home on the subject property. no public opposition was registered for either the 2007 or the 2013 variance. the subject permit was recommended for approval by the department's residential design advisory team and 311 was -- notice was conducted in october of 2013, and no requests for d.r. was filed at that time. the project then was delayed, and planning reviewed and

approved the permit again in february of 2017. the subject permit was issued, then, by dbi on december 29 of 2017. subject permit does meet all the requirements of the 2007 and 2013 variances, and all other relevant planning code sections and the residential design guidelines. as such, the department believes that the permit was properly approved. i'm available for any questions you may have. >> so what type of input did you guys have on the facade, since we're talking about the facade of the property, as well as the planning department, residential, r.t.? >> sure. i don't have exact notes as to what comments were provided. i know it did go through residential design review, and that there were comments, and they were adequately responded to. i believe the permit holder references the issues regarding the front facade and deemphasizing the ground floor and providing more depth at the

upper floors. >> and just last question. i see according to the pictures that the permit holders displayed that most of the original historic features have been removed, but it's gone through historic preservation. >> the existing garage? >> oh, that's right. it's the other house. sorry. >> sure. >> thank you. yeah, the garage. >> okay. so inspector duffy's indicated he has nothing to say at this time. we can take public comment then. whoever would like to step up first, please do. >> my name diane caton, and first of all, before i begin the comments that i prepared, did you say there was no public

input in 2013, because i went to a hearing -- >> i'm sorry. could you direct your comments towards us, please? >> yes. sorry. >> yes. >> i went to a hearing in 2013, but i thought i heard him say there was no public input on our concerns. quite a few of us signed a document at that time. i didn't bring it all with me, but i know i did that, and that's why some of the changes were made, so i'd just like to say for the record that this has been going on for a while, and that the public has responded. >> okay. >> so back to where i was -- back to where i was starting. any way. my name's diane caton. i live at 2 lucky 13, which is across from the proposed house at 13 lucky. we want to say that the facade of the proposed building is not in keeping with the character

of our street, whereas the right lane developers responded that they do not agree to our specifications. if pictures tell a thousand words, allow you to show you some photos. even the few that were covered over the years with vinyl siding and subjected to that unfortunate eraof aluminum framed windows still have their original lines and original entryways, and they all still have their cornices, in other words, their bones are still intact. and by the way, you can see how narrow the alley is.

and also in this photo. well, the white building on the left is what the developers will replace with theirs. i just want to say that our neighborhood is a knowing and intimate neighborhood, and we know our neighbors, so it's important to try to keep that character. in this photo, you see the trees that are on bustling 24th street, which lucky street abuts. which have murals of our neighbors. it's his mural. and we're all part of the calle 24 cultural district. and in 1935, the famed on depression eraphotographer dorothy lane shot this photo here. looking down 24th, all of the buildings are still here, including the one story structure poking up on the

left. >> you need to wrap up, ma'am. >> oh . okay. my home -- i didn't realize that first part that was included. my home is right here on the right. it was built in 1908, and then, we repaired and improved it and got rid of those aluminum framed windows, and we didn't do it for profit. we were just neighbors trying to make things better in our neighborhood. and here are ones next to us but do need work, but they're all intact. >> your time is up, ma'am. >> okay. thank you. >> is there any other public comment? please step forward. >> the neighbor has a few other photos to show here. >> thank you. >> my name's eric diamond i live at 1104 treat.

our house -- our lot is just north of this proposed building, and i think that what we are mostly concerned about is the appearance of the building from the back. and we appreciate the permit holder's continuing to use the horizontal siding. because this new structure is so much taller than the garage, it's going to block a lot of the light from our back yard, so we really appreciate that they would try and use the lightest color paint as possible, especially since this is permanent paint such as to keep as much light in that back yard as possible. i guess i have other concerns because we have children -- is the construction hours, and we understand that construction hours have to start, you know, at 7:00 possibly, that we ask

between the hours of 7:00 and 8:00, that large construction noises are kept to a minimum or nonexistent. we would appreciate there be a security fence. our back alley is very unsecured without a fence, so if the building is to be torn down, that security fence, as they've agreed to, would be in place right away, so that there's no lapse in that. and then, we appreciate the input that they've agreed to have on the fence between 1104 and 1106 property because that is such an integral part of our back yard experience. and i guess just to show a couple of images of -- of buildings within that alley.

>> overhead, please. >> that we have that show that historic nature. >> okay. thank you very much. >> okay. thank you. next speaker, please. no. there's no order. please go ahead and speak if you'd like. >> hi. my name's larissa sand, and i'm the owner of 19 lucky, which is adjacent to the 13 lucky property? i own the building, and currently, my ex-husband and daughter live there wh. when she's not with me, and i ask to say that the lucky neighborhood is really wonderful. it's incredibly diverse, a lot of artists. a lot of people have owned the

buildings in multiple generations. new people, it's a beautiful mix, and i find that everybody's very respectful and listens to each other. i've lived there a while. i'm swapping places with my ex-right now, but i also -- i'm here in support of sasha. i'm an architect myself. i have one of the old very -- you know, 1800 buildings there, and he has been very, you know, respectful, and still continues to listen to our concerns, and i'm in support of doing modern architecture mixed in with old architecture. that's a lot of intent that a city has this diversity. you know, as long as he's respectful of the neighbors concerned, and i feel like he really listens to us and our suggestions, but i am opposed to forcing people to recreate victorian structures as if it's

a movie set. cities change, evolve. we need to mix, and he -- you know, and it's important that he is respecting kind of the guidelines of separating the bottom floor and upper floor, keeping the line of the building, adding depth. not just doing -- i think he originally had a building that was one big flat facade, and he's adding steps, and he's considering adding more depth and texture. i'm here in support. i think he's a very sensitive builder, does mostly small projects and has been very responsive, and so i'm supporting people in my field and my neighborhood. that's it. >> thank you. next speaker, please. >> are you finished, ma'am? >> yes, i'm finished. >> we just wanted to know if you'd fill out a speaker card. >> oh, i did not. i'll fill it out and get it to

you. >> thank you. >> okay. >> i'm gladys swan. i live on 47 lucky street. >> you can move the microphone down. >> i thought when sasha the homes that he picked on lucky, it was a little unfair. he picked -- the renters aren't going to spend a lot of time, unfortunately, but some of us owners do take care. so -- moving in 2004, i went to a lot of meetings. the city had the streetscape plan, and i would go and learn what's available and how to improve. i passed out the fliers for safety, cleanliness and

homelessness as problems. so i worked very hard and met -- and at that time, some of the homes, they're trying to get historic preservation status, and we made it. we're on lucky, right into the middle. the new construction is closer to 24th. i'm in the middle between 24th and 25th, but it's in the -- we made the architecture city accessible. it was included on a walk. the three homes here, 1880's about, and they did them in threes for some reason. were very similar, and then, there's an odd home. three. larissa owns one of them, and then there are some. but i think it's important. they are old, they didn't have

insulation there, i had to redo the foundation, but i tried to keep the character. and i think sasha said about the gates being prisons. i'm single, i'm a senior. it's safety. so i've put the gate up, i've painted. a lot of work. even the first one there, that's the three of us. that's the neighbor. she rents it, but she's done a lot of work. the middle one just sold to a young couple with two daughters, one and three, and they plan to do a lot of work. i think it just takes time. san francisco is so expensive, and you get new people. but in terms of -- >> you need to wrap up, ma'am. >> pardon? >> you need to wrap up. >> begin artists -- most would say a good sense of composition and balance. i look at that drawing.

perhaps if he's done us other work and showed us photographs, we could get a better idea, but that facade, what i see, i see six different windows, six different shapes. i appreciate it's logically [ inaudible ] and empg, but the facade just doesn't fit? . composition balance is important for the neighborhood. lucky is a community. >> thank you. is there any other public comment on this item? >> thanks. >> okay. seeing no other public comment, then, we can have rebuttal starting with the appellant. >> hi. sorry. not too many comments, just to reply to the piece about if we were painting our home, would we clean everyone's homes. my concern is more that for the building process, my balcony is less than 10 feet away from where this building is, if

there's a lot of dust that happens there, i have plants, have a garden -- small one, but if there's a buchnch of dust tt accumulates on the balancony, don't think it's much to ask it be cleaned, and to provide us with a scheduling of when we need to cover it to make sure that stays kind of reasonable. i think that was the only thing that really -- that stood out to me, but again, we're willing to work together, we're willing to negotiate and make should work. we just wanted to make sure our voices were heard since we'll be, you know, so close to the building process and living with the building after it's finished. thank you. >> thank you. >> okay. anything further from the permit holder? you have three minutes of rebuttal, as well. >> just one comment about the garage width. our original design, we were -- we -- so basically, on lucky street, there's no parking on

13 lucky side of the street, in anticipation that the future owners might have one car, we proposed a two car garage, planning asked us to reduce that to a one car garage and reduce it from 14 foot wide to 10 foot wide garage door, which we did, the appeal is asking us to reduce that to 8 feet. given how narrow the alley is, and there are often cars encroaching in the alley on the opposite side of the street, we think a garage as wide as planning would allow is important for a car to park and make the turn on or off of lucky street and make the garage. that's all i have. >> i have a question. two things, sir. one. on the rear facade, what type -- are you using prepainted material or precolored material or are you painting it after. >> yeah. so both the north property line, which abuts 1104 treat, and the rear, we're proposing

to use this horizontal backing. it's a very clean, horizontal siding. clean, which does not require maintenance. >> perfect. are you willing to work with the alley pents regarding the color. >> absolutely. but we just don't want the appellants to have any legal control over our construction. >> and the second thing that they've mentioned is regarding starting at 8:00, having your guys arrive at 7:00, i'm just asking, is that an issue. >> i am a a general contractor. our normal schedule is 7:15 to 3:45. you know, when we first met with lily and her husband, we were very amenable to that, except then they were actually the only people who actually filed a notice of appeal, and then, they let all the other neighbors who are here today in on their appeal to try to make us make facade changes and change the design completely to

an old victorian. >> the question is are you open to -- to starting at 8:00? i know this was starting to -- >> i'd be open to 7:30. yeah. the reason kroos tend to work early -- >> no, i understand. your permit allows us to work until 7:00 or 8:00 at night. i don't think our permit prevents us from working at 8:00 at night. >> this we've been trying a re long time to do this. >> okay. thank you. >> thank you so much. >> mr. teague? >> good evening again. cory teague for planning department staff. just one quick thing. i know one of the speakers stated that she and others may have opposed or provided some

input to the 2013 variance. the information i provided was based on the -- the variance decision letters which generally state if any opposition or support was submitted. the 2007 letter specifically stated there was no support or opposition. the 2013 letter did not state one way or the other. it is possible that that neighbor and/or others maybe came to the hearing and/or testified and had some concerns but did not submit written opposition or that it's possible that for some reason that information was just left out of the 2013 letter, but either way, the point i was making is that there did not seem to be on the record any public opposition as opposed to any specific public input on the project. if that was incorrect, then i apologize. >> thank you. >> mr. teague, quite a few of the items that have been raised here relate to good neighbor

issues. the larger issue that's been brought up, and -- hasn't been fully discussed by all parties, but is the design. what's the department think about that? >> well, the department supports the design. obviously, it's a unique situation. the residential design guidelines and the department generally, we want designs that are of our time but still to the extent possible within the appropriate context of the surrounding community, and the department reviewed this project, and as you heard, had some minor proposals for changes, but with those felt that the project did meet the residential design guidelines. >> okay. thank you. >> commissioners, the matter's submitted. >> commissioners?

>> how do we incorporate the -- i agree with the -- what was said. these are really good neighbor stuff, most -- most of these items, and how do we incorporate these in a -- or where -- what items are -- are appropriate for us to incorporate and really what are building issues versus good neighbor issues? >> well, everything they've spoken with are good neighbor issues. >> yeah. >> we've put restrictions on construction time. >> yeah, yeah. >> you can condition the appeal on those things that they agreed upon, for one, and then, the question is whether some of the other ones also need to be included or not, you know? >> anything in particular that

stands out to you? >> no. i mean, i thought they were all reasonable. and also, i would support the issue that the garage not be narrowed because that's just going to present a hardship to whoever ends up in the -- in the house because we all know about turning radiuses and -- and why set somebody up for failure, and i don't think it's a major issue. plan the department already lowered the size, any way, so i didn't have a problem with that -- that part. >> yeah. i think the only thing that -- and most of these are good neighbor issues is potentially a little bit later start time, and then, a lighter color just because of the shading, and i think that the permit holders have already agreed to that. i mean, it doesn't stop the contractor from turning on a generator at 7:30 and leaving it onto 7:00 right, so i just think those are good neighbor policies that generally this

board does not touch. >> i think we can push along and give a little help on the safety fence. >> yeah. >> during the time the construction, as well. >> correct. >> i think that's reasonable, and it's a security issue that protects all interests. >> sure. is that a motion? >> i -- just pushing it along. >> el jefe? >> you know, even when i was at planning, i rarely, you know, gave design recommendations, you know. i'm of a similar opinion that the city can support many different styles. i think that was the bigger one. and the people who own such styles, well, they'll have to

live with it because it stays permanent, you know? the one that stuck out in my mind a little bit, they should accommodate as a good neighbor issue is if you're going to demoa buildin demoa -- demo a building, you should provide appropriate counter measures against dust and debris. >> how would you -- what would you suggest? >> i think it's difficult. i think the building department has some general guidelines on that respect. they don't have specific ones, but i enthuthink if the develos interested in maintaining good relations, i think that's a natural one that he should do. >> i mean, would you want a condition with such terms, because they're only demoing a single story garage, correct? >> right. but these items that they're talking about, you ththey know have to put in a fence.

they know they've got to coordinate on the ground cover. they've already gone onto fairly light covers. the trellis panels don't have real light colors, although they could be custom-made. you know, those kinds of things they've already done. the other things, some of them are probably ones that i wouldn't support, but you know, some type of covering to prevent dust going on, yeah, i think it's a natural one that most contractors would do. >> you want to take a stab at a motion? >> and commissioners, i just ask that you -- whatever conditions you want to impose, they can be enforceable by dbi. >> exactly. it's hard to force people to agree on the same color of ground cover, you know? >> i'm also not sure how you

can specify what degree of dust or dirt is going to be allowed. >> yeah, exactly. >> so if there are building standards, and the neighbors don't feel they're being met, they can, i would think, go to dbi. >> yeah. >> commissioners. joe duffy, dbi. the only san francisco building code chapter 33 does talk a little bit about site work and dust control and just being a good contractor, basically, keeping the area clean. it's the code section, which they have to meet, any way, so i don't know if we can add anything to that. but certainly, when we get these type of complaints, we're out there right away, and we're dealing with it usually the same day. in my experience, this is one of my districts, so i don't mind sharing my card with anybody that wants it, and if they see anything, e-mail me, and i'll be right there. don't know if that helps. >> well, there's some standard ways.

they have to water when they demo, you know, the debris. >> and there's some areas of the city, hunters point -- it's just general good construction practices to water down and do the normal processes, and i have to say most of the contractors do. >> most of them cleanup in front of their lots on a daily basis. >> will witell, the alternativ they calling the building department, and they have a building inspector halt their work, so it's important to keep a good neighbor in building. >> one thing i like to do is the permit holder to do the outreach before the demolition starts. the next thing, these trucks show up, everybody shows up on the day. i figure do a little outreach beforehand that it's going to happen on a certain day and time. that extra step means a lot to people, as well, so that would be good. >> actually, i'm intending not to put any conditions on this. >> including the safety fence?

is that -- >> yeah, and depend upon the goodwill between the parties. >> okay. you don't want the fence? >> they're going to do it. that's what they said. >> okay. okay. >> all right? i think we should hold them to that. >> okay. >> i mean -- excuse me, they should hold themselves to that. >> commissioner fung is putting the fence up himself, he's saying. >> make a motion. >> go ahead. >> to deny the appeal and uphold the permit on the basis it was properly issued. >> yeah. >> okay. we have a motion from commissioner lazarus to deny the appeal and issue the permit on the basis that it was properly issued. on that motion, [ roll call. ] >> okay. thank you. commissioners. >> oh, you might want to avail

yourself of inspector duffy's card. >> all done, right? >> i understand from the president, we're going to cancel the closed session, so there's no other business before the board tonight. >> i would have loved to have been able to represent something to you, but that has not happened. >> okay. >> i think president's stalling. we should ask for a -- sk >> i think the director and i have another approach if it doesn't move any further. >> it's not going forward?