got. sorry, i don't in front of me. we've we've come to that magical moment where into a pumpkin, okay so now we're just at the information my understanding is we don't have any discussionut these, but i am just noting that they are there for the public. there any board member reports? with that, we adjourn at 929. thanks, all thank you. thanks, ev sfgovtv government television.

>> this is re the abatement appeals board. i like to remine everyone tonot speaking and the first item on the agenda is roll call. president vice president neumann, here.alexander-tut, here. commission meng, here. commissioner shaddix, here. er sommer, here. commissioner williams, here. we have next is our >> the abatement unceded ancestral homeland of the ramaytush ohlone who are the original inhabitants of the san francisco peninsu land and in accordance with their traditions, the ramaytush ohlone have never ceded, lost nor forgotten their respon for all peoples who reside in their traditional territory. as

guests, we recognize that we benefit from and working on their traditional homeland. we wish to pay our respects by acknowledging the ancestors and relatives of the ramaytush comm sovereign rights as first peoples. thank you. next i wanted to announce for day's procedure that one of the agenda items is go to be taken out of order. item b, then case 26925 and thenwill following. next, i like to read the oath. will all parties giving testimony today please stand and raise your right hand? do you swear the testimony you are about to the best of your knowledge? thank you, you may be seated. the public that may

be listening comment call-in number is 415-655-0001, access code, 26641793778. to raise your hand for public comment a specific item, press star the moderator and the webex is 0717. and then also for the are here to presen partment will present their report first, and then the appellate. the department has seven minutes the appellate has seven minutes. after that, the public comment and then minutes of ouitem b, approval of minutes. discussion and possible action to adopt the minutes for special meeting held june 12, 2024. >> so moved. >> there was a issioner alexander-tut and second by vice president neumann.

the minutes? any remotely? no. all commissioners in favor? >> aye. >> thank you. the minutes are approved. next going to agenda item c2.number 6925 201 ashten avenue. owner and wpappellate emberton. action requested by appellant: appellant appeapril 12, 2023 order of abatement and assessment of costs. appellant request the board to rescind and reverse the dbi violation notices (the notice of violation and order of abatement). appellant has also stated that the “removal of blight was completed prior to nov.” >> [microphone not on. to hear speaker] the appellate was timely in we failed to properly post her brief and buthe commissioners. seeing this, we recommend that the case

benext available hearing.71made a mistake and like to do it properly. >> we spoke with the appellate before the hearing and she is and she is still present if you like to ask her. hi. >> you may come forward the microphone. >> hi. >> hi. so, as matthew said, weceived all your materials. we haven't had review them as a board. i would loto hear your opinion on whether you would want us to continue or if you want us move forward today without all of the materials? case to make sure everyone can take a look at all the riate. >> great. i agree with you and i just wanted to make board with us. >> i move to continue this to our next hearing. >> >> there was a motion. who did the second? commissioner the motion by president chavez by vice president neumann and i'll do roll call

this motion. neumann, yes.r-tut, yes. meng, yes. shaddix, yes. sommer, yes. williams, yes. thank you, the motion carries unanimously. again for that. next item is c1. case number 6924. owner of record andl/ rangel samuel and ahmad larizadeh of abatement dated february 7, 2023, and assessment of costs. the order of abatement was issued due to the owviolation within the timeline.” appellant requests revocation of the lien against the subject property. appeant has argued that “no lien is bestowed on subject property: 204 tingley st. city of sf destroyed plans/app in 2020. due to hardship, permit was time of director's hearing. duplicate is being processed now with the city of sf.” and, staff--sorry, the staff wiyou'll present.good morning to everyone,

building inspection commission. joe ing, senior building department of building appeal case on the agenda as one emoved. continued case with appeal case number 6924, property addr204 tingley street.number 6782, lot number, 021. the property is a story building in construction for a family use--[from last heari. [indiscernible] dbi building

inspector review and authorize rear addition construct [indiscern our inspector further found the prthe same violation from in 12 years at served with nov and order of abatement inapl 2012 and july 2013 respectively. a member of the public file a new complaint and n ov issued march 2021. second order of issued in february, due to the owner fail to comply with the code the order of abatement issued following condition:obtain permit and required correction work, including final inspection to the nov and pay for all code following is permit and activity.23, the owner obtained a pe violation. that permit is also the only permit the

owner applied to address the 1@ permit has not been completed with of today. this appeal case was approved by the board continue on today's agenda from last month, permit work still not complete with inspection by dbi yet. the last inspection was performed june 18. reviewed multiple constructionowner required to make correction and for reinspection. recommendation, uphold the order abatement, including assessment of cost nov issued based on the site order of abatement issued the owner failed to permit until june 2023, which was four months after the order abatement issued. given sufficient time to allow the owner to complete corrective work, however the owner failed e to the completed work deviated from the approved plan building code. building exterior increased

the fire hazard. that conclude my presentat >> thank you. the appellate may come forward. >> my name is ahmad, the project sponsor. what they say not what you hear here, someth is non sauns. we applied the permit a long the person who was supposed to be contacted was in jail and couldn't get a hold of her. by the time i figureed a new permit and the permit waws that. the permit was issued, want issued. the order of abatement came in after n the owner contacted me, i tried to find the person, he is deported to mexico, so there is no way they of him or me, because she didnto do. that, and follow up all procedure. the department knows what i did, and what happened unfortunately,

she red some contractor that they didn't know what to do and e money from her and i'm a licensed éj66 tell the building is going on. first of all, whoever has hired to do the job, they put th plywood without the proper for black paper for te they use the wrong plywood. th exterior of the building and on top, corrugated plastic on top of the roof, as you can see, which not even-not supposed to let me show-this is exterior of the plywood.

already deteriorated and are it is not supposed to be.t even used for the siding the building. the poor lady has gone through-this is exterior as you can see, they use the same material and the corrugated roofing. it is not going what it is, she has to start all all the plywood has to go away, the roof has to go away, they have to do the proper siding, proper waterroofing and everything has to be done from the beginning again, she started-she is looking for some contractor. do that. i don't think she is able to fix this problem. all i0 >> especially with lien- >> if you put lien against the property, she might lose the building. y been through a lot of beginning with all

the situation with the guy i give to. he have to go to jail, because i don't know, but i end up losing the money. pay for some drawings again, whicone time i came to the building to check the permit and they say they lost th >> exactly. the drawing has been lost twice in a ro why this happening to me?i was crying because why everything happening to me first person steal the money, a lot of money, second, they lost the awings again, and i don't know, everything--i am asking why it to do the i contact somebody, it is steal the money and right already change the-the material he was

showing with good on with the better so we just--i am here because i want my to be finished to complete, because it is then 30 years. i have been living there. not in the best it is my mansion. that is all i can say. i here because-i'm sorry. >> i think this is conclude our presentation >> thank you. >> you. >> is on this is there then, next we have rebuttal. staff can come forward.

--cannot finish the prtoday, and the next option they may is remove the unauthorized rear the last legal condition. that's it. >> and does the ahave rebuttal? >> i think this is not going to work. we are not going to remove it. not staying the same thing. this lady has two kids and caa smaller house. we want to continue getting the proper contractor to get it done, and we not ng to--there is only 47 square foot addition to this property. unfortunately she getting inractor and she's losing money and she's be i think there is no way we remove it. the thing is, we have done, but it is start all over. she has to go through it sh will go through one way or another.

i would rather you guys not lien the propertyloan and finish it off. that's my last word.to accept the city say remove it, no. she'no going to remove it. >> no. an they keep saying i ro i add extra space in my house, but it not adding. when i buy ke 36 years ago or in 1994, the house extended like in the same-- >> yeah, but we tried to mamaterial was already old. already destroyed, so we tried to better, but all this--i don't know whwrong, but we never saw all building like massive problem. >> okay.ay. >> i just tried to fix my house.

i not going to destroy, i'm sorry if inks i want to destroy house where i have been living in san francisco for more en working for this property and to fix it. i not try to destroy my house. >> to honor the constructed in the building and ancestors lived in it. that do no want to build it better. children and my own where have been raised, because i arrived to that house when i was very young and i want to but it is better condition so we live there. becau in a houseriate to

live inh[ and as you all know, we want a warm lovinwith a bathroom and has good conditions for us to live in. and for my grand children to continue living there, and i do not want d that's the reason i'm here, so you me to remove this lien and not to have the doors closed so i can continue living my home. thank you. >> thank you for your consideration. thank you. commissioner-board members deliberation. >> commissioner williams. >> before deliberating, i suppose the question i have what is what is

the present danger to public health and the property? in the first page of the mabuilding with undetermined fire and unsafety building element what are those elemen >> as you can see photo, the current is exposed wood frame building structure and they are unprotected from fire like stucco or terial that protect from fire. any fire happen that increase the fire 7' hazard to >> commissioner alexander-tut. >> yes, thank you. i few questions. first to the department and to the appellate. the first question is the department, can you tell what is the tus of the permit? the current status and scope the permit. the most

>> they only have one permit on has been issrecord show in june 2023, and they start doing work and u can see exhibit i, which show the inspection history. they did get spection from last hearing. it was june 17 and the following day scheduled for inspection. our building inspector found out they have multdeficiency not comply with the building code and approved plan.can find the page on page 13 of the report, and which i put it in red would just add, after the last hearing i with a spanish speaking inspector and agreed spanish speaking inspector out for the inspection seeing if there is a easy path forward but the work

been done and everybody agrees it creates-it is not protectinguse, the interior of the house anthe neighbors.add, very sympathetic with the property owner here.in front of you. we already have a existing order of abatement from 2012.se to uphold this order and they do go for a we have a subordinate subordinate the lien to any lender. >> can you bring the mic forward? could you talk about the subordination proc e? >> sure. basically we are telling the owner come in and ask to subordinate the thwhich takes precedence. normally i rnment liens take precedence over all okely to lend with those there, but we have a ree to set the money aside to make the repairs, we will lower-trying to think of otword,

subordinate our order to bottom of the list and the prote there is money set aside in escrow the repairs, but it allows the property owner to go ahead and obtain financing. >> that is very helpful. thank you i also--i have a question about ju the case itself. the fipage it says weathering, but we heard a lot permit talks about-the description of instruction history goes beyond permitting and what we heard from appellate is also the scope goes beyo is what before us-if they were to just weather, like do the weathering, would that complete the notice of violation? confused about what is in front

>> this photo 12 years ago, this rear addition is uàauthorized that exposed roof frame is unprotected from fire, not only just so, in case a fire happen, it will increase the fire burn quicker and strong. >> you will be able to come back in just a moment. >> this photo captured recently in june 18 and they remain unchanged. you can see the rñroof is also unprotected with like plexiglass or plastic the top. >> so, the-are both this is a violation or

one dated march 2, 2021 that talks weather? >> i can clarify that.k was done in 2012 and have order of abatement for nythe notice of violation is they failed to weproof it over the 12 creates a hazard. this notice of violation is for g. right? you have the original notice of construction, it just took so long to get the permit to it created additional hazard, so today we are only weather proofing. unfortunately, it was my hope they could go out and actually weather proof this and we walk away, but the underlying is substandard so they can't put a roof and siding on because the i suppose if you wanted to order temporary weather proofing while the work is being moved forward. i think that would be equitable solution. >> would-thank you

everyone for the time. the supposed solution from the department to the appellate. if we-would you be able to accept temporary weatherizing while the rest of the work is being done? is that you can do and how long would that take to do? you want the paement appellate to come for withered? forward? >> yes. >> i'm a contractor. this isn't a easy job. you are dealing with has been done, wrongly done, so take it all out, withe new plywood, then we have to put the stucco i don't think it will happen overnight. either you give--you accept not them the abatement so she has enough to hire regulfinish the job, and i will foll thmake sure that she--i'm a censed contractor, but don't do construction anymore, but i rather help her oa bad

situation, and i'm willing time, free time for her to but this isn't going to happen overnight. >> just temporary weatherization- >> temporary isn't going to is complicated situation that plget into it, but they don't know how to get out of it. in order to get out need money and if you don't money, one person kids, i don't think she can do it. win the lotto or something and can move out of the pl first of all, it is too small. small bed room, corner building with one bathroom, how can three people live it, i don't know. this is unacceptable to puis lady into so much >> the smallest house you can stay in then the onin really bad shape. we try [indiscernible] the neighborhood is nice my house have to be nice.

why you don't give me i don't like to have my house. this is my house. like i say, mansion. it is what i work right now i'm here try to [indiscernible] i'm so sorry. >> thank you. >> thank you. >> commissioner williams. 1rfor the appellate, sympathetic to your presenting us with a unds like you want to keep the addition without removing it, but you are not presenting any- >> solution. >> yeah, so what is the timeline and solution? the loan, because you are stating there needs to be enough timeline we have been presented, there has been time, so what is what is the solution here so we can have something to work with? >> asgot involved

and needed help, so i'm here to help. but, i will follow with the-maybe the loan or something or job site and see whether we can get some contractor can come up with a reasonable price, the loan. if you put the lien against the property she is not go basically,b that is what it is. contractor and get it started and keep the partment informed that procedural g through, we call for inspection and i think this can be done, but i said, it tae a expert in this, so much the right money can take one or two months to do it, but wr isn't going to happen. maybe 6 months. i sa6 months it would be done jts. months. >> director greene, how would thth the new lender, because my understanding would be that on the property-the city could agree to have the new liens to the older liens,

but e new lender between the department and new lender to have lien be subordinant to the lender lien? of the innerworkings of the lender but we agree to subordinate our loan. a lot and not in this specific circumstance, but essentto the city to sw is a clause within the city en that says, willing to subordinate under circumstances, and then the lender-it gets recorded as a subordinant, so that the order entities can collect the money, should there >> yeah. first in time first is right so this what i was wondering if there is a lender. unless there is agreement they are subordinant to the existing lien. yeah.

>> absolutely. >> okay. from what i d be, we could-there needs to be some with the weathering, that can't be left out there without doing anything with that. if the appellate is wi something for that, then i would be comforsome additional time for the work to be completed without having to take the unit down, but if it is not done within that time, then it down, and there has to be enforcement. so, for the appellate--if that were the position, would that be feasible? as i said, feasible if they can gret the money.st got involved. i tried to see whether she can get some something or find reasonable contractor to come up with the solution. i promise i can hecan say. >> okay. >> putting a lien again property with this situation i don't think it

will serve any purp it just make her worse then what but, by cooperating with her, that nothing is impossible.find the right solution, then there should be no problem. i have done it and this isn't going to be the one, but why put the against somebody? [indiscernible] >> to answer th ny years, sthat would be the answer to that. we are willing--i'm not going to speak for anybody else, but we can come to a solution, but we need to know what the >> we are coming up with solution. we said give 6 months and see get it done within 6 months. as i said, i put myin there to just help the process. i don't need anything to collect from >> i'm done. >> i have sympathy for

what you're going through, and i understand nstruction is complicated and difficult. it has been 12 years since the original i can't imagine that it is healthy to be occupying that space.recognize that that has been to the neighborhood during that period as well the rest of your home at risk should that catch in addition to mold, mildew, proofing issues, things that nature. violation is to create urgency and moving forward anseem to have worked thus far. i don't see how removing moves forward the process any i'm inclined to uphold it. i think we can give more dy. i don't know how other folks feel on--i dont know what the for the lien or

has it noe full assessment of cost. >> iton page 28. > representative, you can have a seat. thank you. you can have a seat.ou. >> the outstanding balance is around 4 thousand something, but that is not the final, because they add based on how long the case sit in division. with your authority or tiwe can consider do some waver. >> commissioner alexander-tut. >> so, what i'm hearing is that biggest obstacle to this is not facts, not the-there is no the code or the city's process, it the lien.

and getting that loan in order p1 so, i like to make a motion to put this 60 days. that gives you 60 days to get the loan and if the after the loan you have the loan and i continue the work. and so, that should loan question, but 'bd create that level of urgency so you do the neighborhood and the house. that is my suggestion that we put the abeyance and to the attorney, means for the commission?putting in abeyance for 60 days would just not be in effect for-- >> are you not hearing her? >> the order being in abeyance e order would not be issued in effect for tha my understanding is that means

that they e order is not yet in effect when they go seek out a be something thatlien on the property. >> i'm not inclined to give period for the work to be done. i think there's-i'm very sympathetic, but i the balanced approach where we can both protect th and protect the neighborhood as well as give you the space to hopefully move. i woulápd to point out that if the lien is put in place once the loan is they could be found that is also something to >> i don't have a way to get that. >> that may be something be considered. >> not necessarily, but basically you could be found of your loan terms if a lien is placed on your property during the io which you hold the loan. therefore obtaining

the to subordinate. >> in this circumstance, -i think the would be easier n?é#to have--it would easier to obtain the loan without the lien, but should the lien go g6into place after the loan is gi creates additional complications. that is not our problem to i'm just-i feel we should be aware of the way those >> that is a important flag >> i think the solution-let us work with the department for 90 mdays one more extra--we get started right we keep contact with them to see what the loan is all about. obviously we dont want to put the-it goes to the will be money will be called back. it isn't going to help anything if you worry about one extra month. you can give us a-enough chance maybe sooner we can get it but

we keep contact with the department and make sure every with the department. i have been doing it so i think we can work it out. >> thank you for thliberation right now. >> i know, just trying to help. >> okay. it is a process. sorry about that. thanks. >> it sound to me like the c and trying to figure out a solution that balances both something that works for you, but also is going to make sure this is something remedied and siover a decade that this has been unsafe, not only for you all, but for the neighborhood, so i am not quite sure what makes sensove forward with. but open to it sounds like perhaps putting the lien first--it cost, might be easier way to obtain the loan

and not pudefault, but if somebody else has a different soluf9tion i'm open. ation with the department and is there was some cooperation with the department. i dont know is something--within obeyance, enforcement if that would be different from just continuing this hearing for 60and saying we'll continue this for 60 days, you come if it is not done, we will just enforce this thing. i dont know--to me that migh simpler, but that creates a risk if a i recommend in that time the llate takes measures to make sure it becomes--the some action needs to be taken. get the financing for the work, that needs to be or at least progress needs to be shown. that is my position i think with the lien i would understand how

some complications with the financing, but i don't know if this st. the right solution or not. these are my thoughts on it. >> [indiscernible] >> just re motion to uphold the order of abatement and 60 days if there is a second after the discussion. >> this may a friendly amendment, instead of enforcement that it just be continuance of this hearing for 60 days. >>commissioner sommer-- >> [indiscernible] . it is hard whuction and bunch of circumstances, i hear you. i difficulty from the board and department is the timeframe. wetalking about a order of abatement from now ago, however the issue that created was ordatement from 10 years for that or 8 years before that,

which a challenge.it been addressed in that time? i can guess. so have two kids. however, i think it makes it (chal in suof a bunch of options that are all ul, i would go with alexander-tut proposed to hold abeyance for still says that we are-there is still notice of is still pending to be enforced and will be enfor60 days, but you can get your loan without >> are we saying that in 60 day need to see a start of work? yeah? >> and th then the lien doesn't go into place, they just start working to > then-okay. so if it is not--if that person is also did not complete the work or whatever and however long-is there a guarantee we won't be that action?

>> no. >> not really. >> none of [laughter] >> that is true. but i suppose--that's why it is normally to completion, right?order of abatement, you have to be completed to not have of abatement. >> uh-huh. >> then you know it is taken care of. i think if 60 days-it 60 days we know it won't and that means the rded in 60 days, basically? and so you can in the meantime. >> and hope [indiscerhow that works i suppose. i are don't know if i have a good solution. know much about lending laws, but it does seem as apply to a loan now without they would have to notify there is a risk of default and at that point it might be difficult to subordinate that

lien if the orde i would know not a lot about lending laws, but have to disclose anyway, that there is a order of abatement. it is a material fact, and >> construction insurance that has to be put into place as well. x(jo >> right. >> i just like to clarify for the board, there order of abratement from the 2012, so they have to go rough the subordination process with us anyway. so perhaps we uphold the current order. are you seconding the motion >> i'm not, because-- >> commissioner alexander-tutlike to amend or-- >> yeah. i just want to i dont want to have this again. i don't have the conversation again inis what i anticipate happening. if we are expect anything to change and

we will set of facts before us, the same difficult decision, so i want is to i would lean one of two and interested hearing the longer that we think the work should in, and i can't predict all the ins and outs of somebody else's r extend what we think if it is-6 months feels long to me and what will be rainy season so that is black-out for construction. whatever--say 6 molding so i like to see what the rest of commission is-- toward upholding the order.

open to discussing fees, because it like the financial piece has been the largest barrier and when we talking about the quoted price we was 50, 60 thousand dollars and fees that are probably 10 percent that cost.n make a larger impact we feel like we want to stable to move forward more quickly. >> commissioner shaddix. >> th i know there is not a best solution in all this, but leaning also towards upholding and i'm liking what i'm hearing though. the additional 60 days, but strange feeling we will be back in 60 days doing this so leaning more towards upholding. >> i have to agi am leaning towards upholding. curious what options we have terms of financial c are there wavers or things we can do that might that regard? >> i think they can

that's fine. >> so, there are two separate motions potentially. one, upholdor reverse or put the order of abatement in and then the second would be with respect to assessment of costs. >> seperal motion. se a motion to uphold and then-- - [multiple speakers] j. >> correct. >> i like to make a motion to uphold. >> i want to be--so, your motion is to upholdorder of abatement? >> yes. the 60 days? okay. there is a motion to of abatement and is there a second? >> second. >> oka is by president chavez and second by do a roll call vote on the motion. president chavez, yes. -turn hones, please. sorry. vice president neumann, yes. mmis commissioner meng, yes.

commissioner shaddix, yes. commissioner sommer, yes. commissioner the motion carries unanimously. and then there motion. >> i like to open discussion to wave the fees. >> so, this second motion is to wave the assessment of costs? f" >> is there a second? >> i wanted ssion first-- >> excuse me? >> open for discussion. >> okay. am inclined to oppose, because this is every appeal hearing says there is a hardship andb never a case where everyone says the fees are fine. at people are concerned about and i don't is a metric for deciding who not worthy of how to make that i am extremely sympathetic and try to but not inclined to reduce the fees. >> also, i want to remind the board about the to

hear appeals regarding issuance of final of cost imposed persundt to substantial error by >> if there is no other coclose discussion and leave it at what we already decided. >> [indiscernible] en motion right now? >> there was a s no second. she said she wanted to open for discussion. >> i'll withdraw. >> she is with motion. >> the first motion was withdrawn and your new motion is to uphold the as >> yes. >> the there is a motion by president chavez of cost. is there a second? >> second. >> there is a commissioner alexander-tut. roll call vote on the motion, presi vice president neumann, yes. commissioner meng, yes. commissioner shaddix, yes.sioner sommer,

yes. commissioner williams, yes. motion ank you. next we are on item d, new appeals orabatement case 6926, laguna street. owners of reco & appe action requested by appellant: appellant appeals the june 28, 2022 order of abatement and assessment of costs and re-hearing. appell> fire hose cabinet approval as a prerequisite to obtain permit.” appellant seeks “removal of abatetu to non-board member or agent.” appellant also request for jurisdiction on the ground that their “peit application is waiting for dbi approval.” heir “permit application is waiting for dbi approval.”inspector ing, would you -like to rúorgoing to >> yes. >> thank you. now we'll begin the last case.

appeal property address, 2121 laguna street. lot number, 019. the property is four story building in construction for amily residential building in [indiscernible] dbi issued 2018 and 2019 respectively after receiving two anonymous complaints from the member of about there [indiscernible] building parking garage. the nov was closed as it was to be a [indiscernible] this violation refer to code enforcement november 2018. order of abatement issued june 2022 hearing officer. today, over 6 years first nov date back in february 2018, however the not been completed with

sign off. the obtained a permit approval attend to comply with the ion, however, this permit still has not been completed with inspection to date. staff recommendation, uphold the order abatement, including assessment of cost. 2018, the owner failed to comply with timeline. four years after the first nov date, the order of abatement issued june 2022. to date,over two years has elapsed from of abatement date, however the violation still that concludes my presentation. >> thank you. >> thraunk. thank you. the appellate come forward. >> yes, good morning. my name is robert caruso with we are a construction project management business and we have hired by the property management company, pmc to look this situation and to

go through the history what happened, and bring everybody up to date onis now. so, i got all the minutia going back to 2018 when the first nov was filed. that was in february 22, and they subsequentially there was a permit ucation with dbi submitted in27, 2020 and the permit was the 5 of 2023, and i have the permit number if you the work was started to mitigate that situation with that retaining wall in july-sorry, yeah, july of-that's not correct. it is july 2023 and completed september 2023. rainbow water proofing and restoration, that was the general the structural engineer on the job was murp burr and curry and then

the-i dont know if into some of the details of this. when you do a like that, it involves concrete and retaining walls you have to inspections and special inspector who is independent of the general contractor and the owner goes out and makes sure work performed was performed to that company was applied materials and engineering. so, the work was done, was completed. the inspections took pla that permit issued. ame submittthe special inspection group which is part of d bi. there are two pieces that and one 6of my criticisms of this, what should hathe general contractor should have followed up and made sure those inspections were submitted to dbi, however, the

ame maintains all the reports and special inspections were submitted. there are two issues and i talked to inspector ing about this, there is two issues, one involved shot rñ process used instead of pouring the shot-if you want to look like a gun ncrete, so that negated the one report special inspection group requires, and the other was, regarding how the concrete was cored and the way it was done negates the requirement for a second issue or second requiremthat the special inspection group has. really, to boil all this down, now working with and the we have to go back and sit down the inspector, over the counter inspector get his approval for these two swere used by

rainbow water i'm confident that those will be accepted by that over the that's when the permit can be finally signed off.sues hanging up that permit, but the wo looked at it, it was done in a quality we had some pretty reputable players in the l ntractor and structural engineer and then does the special inspection. in my mind, it was a paperwork issue creating the fact that this permit hasn't finally been signed off. we are working with-i joseph ing this week and we are all on the same page of what has to happen to get these two inspections that on the inspection group uses, to get those i that's it. you have any ess of me? >> you can have a up if they have questions. th

next there is public comment. any public comment on is item? seeing none in person, is there e. next, rebuttal. is there rebuttal? >> again, we are here today the order of abatement is issued correctly and nov issued correctly. the detearated so requires repair, so that is nov is issued correctly. the order of abatement is back in june 28, 2022 and as of they still cannot get the permit final. the order abatement is correct. even those correction are before der abatement issued and there is the appellate informed me they tried to revise it, ey need to submit new permit application to have

the dbi engineer can be revisthat's my rebuttal. thank you. ate have rebuttal? okay. >> there is reference from page 15 of my report shows the status of the inspection and current inspection was performed by third party and it is still outstanding, so pleas review page 15. >> appellate? >> i have in my hand here a copy of plication and that shows it was submitted and finally issued in 2023, and ment here from ame that ey,l submitted to dbi in 1qwhich they addressed those two issues remaining to be signed dbi in order to finalize . i'm under the impression, piecing this together that a pe and the work

was done. went in in 2020 and my understanding itwasn't issued until 2023 because of the process-approval have to take place to get the permit issued. ething that is strange to me, because i do a lot of work in san francisco and there process that takes time, so that this document i have, this copy it was issued in 2023, and the work was in july of 2023. and have the applied materials engineering letter here that is datedof 16, 2023 in which are still open today. these the special inspections office is for. what has to have happened, which should have when that letter was submitted, a meeting 9tcalled with dbi, meet with the over the counter inspector

have those two points those two fact that they were not necessary of the process used to do the co in my mine it is a , and it was want to be super critical, sloppy in the sense been done immediately and this is kind but, when i do a lot of construction i say in san francisco and in my mind this is not a this is something that could be resolved, but it has to be the minds. there has to be a meeting to go through address these two processes that were used in construction and show that those two items not necessary. >> thank you. the board

what being-what we are reviewing today? i feel i heard that are up for contest. it that the--yes. i'm asking our staff. >> they are the order of abatement. >> generally? >>we haven't completed the permit? >> the paperwork issue there is structural observation letters when subthe engineer of record. generally we work with engineer of record. let me back up. structural observation is required engineer bmit plants and the plan checker approves or notforward that is the permit. strthe engineer there are two required and haven't received the those. the appellate is saying-whether they use [indiscernible] we have special t there are two

other items one just general concreis for the to view the location of the steel prior to drilling detail. we have never gotten that from the engineer and on top that, they never called for inspection by the district inspector to look at the work before it #was covered up. we can work >> we are missing a couple documents? >> yes. really helpful. thank you. commissioner willifor mr. caruso. referencing permits documents you have, you have copies? >> i have just the one in my handwe have those in our-- don't know which document. >> whatever you are looking referencing, if we can look at it, it may be helpful.the overhead. >> you the permit you are speaking-- >> this is actually--

>> this is the information on and when it was issued, correct? we are curious the inspection documents. ments about the special inspection. i have this they to the shot creek and rebar. the way they ióattthat wall, they broke it down so they didn't touch of the rebar, so they could see the t the shot crete on and why they are maintatwo issues are not rm

particular project. i'm confident when they do have this meeting with the special inspection group that it is going to be accepted. you have additional questions? do you have what you need here? >> yes, i are think we do. thank you. i think--well,b it may whether or not these things are solved at this exact moment. i have been in this before, you submit a ments and changes and go back and talk about deand revise it. it sounds like everything was done, it sounds like the last happen, that's fine. that is sort tive of the notice of violation issue which ess. this is what is throwing me a bit. and said unsafe condition. can you fix this? they did. they got plans fixed everything. it isn't totally signed off. what?

there was a unsafe condition it was given 30 days to >> my understanding it was two anonymous calls, which i think-not sure of this, but of them was one of the hoa member. >> nt. >> anyway, they called in and this retaining wall. >> sure. >> that was the violation. now, i think there was-go ah >> maybe i can hear from the staff. someone calls in an issue, the city comes and it and say yes, there is a issue. building owner you need that is your what notice of the first contac >> the building department received phone call from member of public, so we went out to do investigation and confirm and we issued nov to make it enforceable to make the repair work. if they don't then we move forward dule.

they still not [indiscernible] >> got it. okay. >> i also want to--so called ospecial inspection requirement under my report, page 16, screening or scanning rer,portant to avoid damage in the existing rebar inside- is all between the tg is on the form, somebody has to address it.keplace somebody needs to explain why and say why is somebody called in a complaint, violation issued, fix this, they filed for a permit, it took a while. while to get the permit approved. it didn't get approved and the the timeline designated oen the noting of violat order of abatement, right? >> there is more history to. they had a hearing in july 2022 and we gavthem continuance there. and they got another continuance on in december 2022. >> so it has taken too lo we are not meeting the

timelines agreed we worked with them about the order of abatement officer said this is enough and issued the order of abatement. >> to me, true l th that t was repaired and permit is close to being closed out and there was notice of violation and order abatement was appropriately issued in and unsafe condition, right? in which case, it is it not inappropriate to order of abatement in my opinion. it doesn't effect the work that is currently happening done and i'm glad that is fixed. it sounds like it was fixed appropriately, but there was lapse or--it sounds like at the r or whom the agreement was, it didn't get done in that line timeline and whether that legitimate or not, i can't say, but it did not. >> two continuances. >> two continuances, so-to me i

think glad this was handled appropriately, but i don't see a uphold the order yes. if i may. >> commissioner. >> i have a question. is the order of abatement applied to just the owner who lives in condo unit 1a? >> this would be entire building. >> okay. >> commissioner sommer, would you like to make a-i heard a motion maybe from i will make a motion to uphold the order of abate >> second. motion by commissioner sommer to uphold the a second? >> commissioner alexander-tut. >> second by ñr-tut. okay.

so we'll do roll president chavez, yes. vice pres commissioner alexander-tut, yes. si commissioner shaddix, yes. commissioner sommer, yes.iams, yes. the motion passes unanimously. general public comment. sorry. >> i belieis also assessment of cost issue.nce it is not the last should have another >> is there a motion to uphold the >> also a motion to uphold the assessment of cost. >> there is a motion by nded by commissioner alexander-tut to uphold assessment of costs. on that motion. president chavez yes. vice president neumann, yes. commissioner alexander-tut, yes. commissioner shaddix, yes. commissioner sommer yes. commissioner williams, yes. the motioncarries unanimously. to

item d, general public comment. memberoffs the pu board on matters within the board's jurisdiction agenda. any general public comment on the abatement appeal said board? seeing none in person, non remotely. item e is adjournmentf. is there a motion to adjourn? >> so motioned. >> is there a second? >> second. >> we are now adjourned. commissioners are in favor of being adjourned. we will take a brief, 5, 10 recess and reconvene as the building inspection commission. [meeting adjourned] in the 49

promotes local businesses, and challenges resid to do their shopping within the 49 square by supporting local services in our neighborhood, we help san francisco remain unique, successful, and vibrant so where will you shop and dine in the 49? >> i am the owner restaurant. wee been here in north beach over 100 years. [speaking foreign language]av [♪]zq! [speaking foreign language]

[♪] [speaking foreign language] [speaking foreign language] i/ ♪]

[♪] >> good morning. todjuly 17, 2024. this is the regular meeting of the building inspection commission. i would like to remind if you are not speaking, and the first item on the agenda is roll call. president alexander-tut, here.. commissioner chavez, here.issioner meng here. commissioner neumann, here.commissioner sommer, here. commissioner williams, here.