>> this is meeting of the abatement appeals board. i like to remine everyone to are not speaking and the first item on the agenda is roll call. president vice president neumann, here. commissioner alexander-tut, here. commoner meng, here. commissioner shaddix, here. commissioner sommer, here. commissioner williams, here. we have next is our >> the abatement appea unceded ancestral homeland of the ramaytush ohlone who are the original inhabitants of the san francisco peninsula. as the indigenous stewards of this land and in accordance with their traditions, the ramaytush ohlone have never ceded, lost nor forgotten their responsibilities as the caretakers of this place, as well as for all peoples who reside in their traditional territory. as guests, we recognize that we benefit from livingj< and working on their traditional homeland. we wish to pay our respects by acknowledging the ancestors and relatives of the ramaytush coheir

sovereign rights as first peoples. >> thank you. next i wanted to announce for today's procedure that one of the agenda items is go to be taken out of order. item b, approval of minutes and then case 26925 and will be 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 in 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 password is 0717. and then also for the that are here to prestoday, the department will present their report first, then the appellate. the department has seven xt the appellate has seven minutes. after that, be the public comment and then each side has three minutes of rebuttal time. our next agenda item is item b, approval of minutes. discussion and possible action to adopt the minutes for special meeting held june 12, 2024. >> so moved.

>> there was a commissioner alexander-tut and second by vice president neumann. is there any public comment on the minutes? seeing none, is there 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 appellate emberton. action requested by appellant: appellant appeals the april 12, 2023 order of abatement and assessment of costs. appellant request the board to rescind and reverse the dbi violation notices (the n violation and order of abatement). appellant has also stated that the “removal of blight was

completed prior to nov.” >> [microphone not on. unable to hear speaker] the appellate was timely in ut we failed to properly post her brief the commissioners. seeing this, we recommend that the case be continued to our next available hearing. sorry about that, we just made a mistake and like to do it properly. >> is the appellate aware? >> 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, we have not received all your materials. we haven't had the opportunity to review them as a board. i would love to 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 information is most appropriate.

>> great. i agree with you and i just wanted to make sure that you were on board with us. >> excellent. thank you. >> i move to continue this to our next hearing. who did the second? commissioner the motion by president chavez by vice president neumann and i'll do roll call vote on this motion.r neumann, yes.ander-tut, yes. meng, yes. shaddix, yes. sommer, yes. williams, yes. thank you, the motion carries unanimously. b again for that. next item is c1. case number 6924. owner of record land rangel

samuel and ahmad larizadeh action requested by appellant: appellant appeals the order of abatement dated february 7, 2023, and assessment of costs. the order of abatement was issued due to the owner's failure “to comply with the code violation within the timeline.” appellant requests revocation of the lien against the subject property. llant 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 not processed time of director's hearing. duplicate is being processed now with the city of sf.” and, staff--sorry, the staff willyou'll present. good morning to everyone, and building inspection commission. joe ing, senior building

department of building inspection and appeal case on the agenda as one case just removed. continued case with appeal case number 6924, property 204 tingley street. number 6782, lot number, 021. the property is a story building in construction for a family from last hearing. [indiscernible] dbi building inspector review and authorize rear addition construct [indis our inspector further found the property owner repeat the same violation from in 12 years ago that served with nov and order of abatement in april 2012 and

july 2013 respectively. a member of the public file a new complaint and n ov issued march 2021. as a result, second order of abatement issued in february, due to the owner fail to comply with the code violation within the timeline. the order of abatement issued following condition:obtain permit and complete all required correction work, including final inspection to the nov and pay for all code enforcement fees. following is permit and activity. 2023, the owner obtained a permit approval to correct the violation. that permit is also e only permit the owner applied to address the violation,this permit has not been completed with dbi final inspection as of today. this appeal case was approved by the board to continue on today's

agenda from last month, however, the required permit work still not complete with final inspection by dbi yet. the last inspection was performed june 18. reviewed multiple construction the owner required to make correction and for reinspection. recommendation, uphold the order of abatement, including assessment of cost due to nov issued based on the site order of abatement issued owner failed to obtain permit until june 2023, which was four months after 7c÷:the order abatemen given sufficient time to allow the owner to complete the corrective work, however the owner fa due to the completed work deviated from the approved plan and not complied with the building code.

building exterior increased the fire hazard. that conclude my presentatio >> thank you. the appellate may come forward. >> my name is ahmad, the project sponsor. what they say not ycomplete true. what you hear here, 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 was issued. he knows that. the permit was issued, it is not it want issued. the order of abatement came in after when the owner contacted me, i tried to find the person, he is deported to mexico, so there is no way they .j could of him or me, because she dnto do.

that, and follow up all procedure. the department knows what i did, and what happened unfortunately, she hired some contractor that they didn't know what to do and the money from her and i'm a licensed contractor and i tell the buildi is going on. first of all, whoever has hired to do the job, they put the plywood without the proper for black paper for they use the wrong plywood. exterior of the building top, used 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 k!pl is already deteriorated and are it is not supposed to be.not even used for the siding of the building. the poor lady has gone through-this is exterior back of the building. as you can see, they use the same material and dçthe corrugated roofing. it is not going to protect anything. what it is, she has to start all over 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. $140 thousand estimate she got to do that. i don't think she is able to fix this

problem. all we are asking-- >> especially with lien- >> if you put the lien against the property, she might lose the building. ÷@ q >> i already been through a lot of beginning with all the situation with the guy i give the money to. he have to go to jail, because i don't know, but i end up losing the money. i give it to him and i have to pay for some drawings again, one time i came to the building to check the permit and they say they lost the drawings. remember? >> exactly. the drawing has been lost twice in a row. say, why this happening to me? i remember i was crying because why everything happening to me first person steal the money, a

lot of money, and second, they lost the drawings again, and i don't know, everything--i am asking why it to do the time i contact somebody, it is steal the money and right already change the-the material he was showing with good one. with the better so we just--i am here because i want my house to be finished to complete, because it is my house for more then 30 years. i have been living there. not in the best condition,it is my mansion. that is all i can say.

i am here because-i'm sorry. >> i think this is conclude our presentation. >> thank you. >> ank you. >> is there any public comment on this is there any remotely? then, next we have rebuttal. staff can come forward. --cannot finish the project in time today, and the next option they may is remove the unauthorized rear addition, and restore to the last legal condition.

that's it. >> and does the appellate have rebuttal? >> i think this is not going to work. we are not going to remove it. z? we are not staying the same thing. this lady has two kids and in a smaller house. we want to continue getting the proper contractor to get it done, and we not going to--there is only 47 square foot of e addition to this property. unfortunately she getting into contractor and she's losing money and she's been going g. i think there is no way we remove it. the thing is, we have done, but it is e to start all over. she has to go through it she way or another. i would rather you guys not lien the property so she can get a loan and finish it off. that's my last word. g to accept the city say remove it, no. she's going to remove it.

>> no. and i want to mention, they keep saying i add a room, i add extra space in my house, but it is not adding. when i buy this holike 36 years ago or in 1994, the house extended like in the same-- >> yeah, but we tried to make it new because the material was already old.d, so we tried to fix better, but all this--i don't knowrong, but we never all this building like this massive problem. >> okay. okay. >> i just tried to fix my house. i not going to destroy, i'm sorry if he thinks i want to destroy

my house where i have been living in san francisco for more then 30 years, been working for this property and to fix it. i not try to destroy my house. >> to honor the persoat constructed in the building and ancestors that lived in it. that built it. do not want to destroy it, i want to build it better. children and my own where i have been raised that house when i was very young and i want to conserve it. but it is better condition so we can live there. because we have a

in a house that is appropriate to live in and as you all know, we want a warm loving home with a bathroom and has good conditions for us to live in. and for mygrand children to continue living there, and i do not want and 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 in my home. thank you. >> thank you your consideration. >> thank you. commissioner-board members deliberation. >> commissioner williams. >> before deliberating, i suppose the

question i have for staff what is the-if there what is the present danger to public health and safety with the condition of the property? yp in the first page of the materials building with undetermined fire and unsafety building elements. what are those elements? >> as you can see from the photo, the current condition is exposed wood frame building structure and they are unprotected from fire like stucco or material that protect from fire. any fire happen that increase the fire hazard to >> commissioner alexander-tut. >> yes, thank you. i have a few questions.

first to the department and to the appellate. the first question is the department, can you tell what is the current status of the permit? the current status and scope of the permit. the most >> they only have one permit on has been issued back record show in june 2023, and they start doing work and gáyou can see exhibit i, which show the inspection history. they did get inspection from last hearing. it was june 17 and the following day scheduled for inspection. our building inspector found out they have multiple the building code and approved plan. you can find the page on page 13 of the

report, and which i put it in red june 18. >> i would just add, after the last hearing i met with the appellate in the office with a spanish speaking inspector and agreed to send a spanish speaking inspector out for the inspection seeing if there is a quick easy path forward but the work been done and everybody agrees it is substandard. it creates-it is not protecting house, the interior of the house and elevated hazard to the neighbors. i just add, very sympathetic with the property owner here. we have a tough decision in front of you. we already have a existing order of abatement from 2012. choose to uphold this order and they do go for a we have a subordinate au subordinate the lien to any lender.

>> can you bring the mic forward? could you talk about the subordination process more?zq >> sure. basically we are telling the owner come in and ask to subordinate the en, which takes precedence. normally government liens take precedence over all otherlikely to lend with those there, but we have a process if they agree to set the money aside to make the repairs, we will lower-trying to think of another word, subordinate our order to bottom of the list and the pro but it allows the property owner to go ahead and obtain financing. >> that is very helpful. thank you i also--i have st the case itself. the first page it says weathering, but we heard a lot ae permit

talks about-the description of the instruction history goes beyond permitting and what we heard from the appellate is also the scope goes beyond is what before us-if they were just weather, like do the weathering, would that complete the notice of violation? 'm confused about what is in front of >> this photo cap 12 years ago, this rear addition is unauthorized. that exposed roof frame is unprotected from fire, not only just weather. so, in case a fire happen, it

will increase the fi burn quicker and strong. >> you will be able to come back in just a moment. >> is photo captured recently in june 18 and al they remain unchanged. you can see the roof also unprotected with like plexiglass or plastic material on the top. >> so, both this is a violation or one dated march 2, 2021 that talks out weather? >> i can clarify that.work was done in 2012 and have order of abatement for tice of violation is they failed to weaproof it over the 12 years, creates a hazard. this notice of violation is for

the weather proofing. right? you have the original notice of the violation about illegal construction, it just took so long to get the permit to that it created additional hazard, so today we are only hearinweather 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 the fr i suppose if you wanted 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 ing 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 something that has been done, wrongly done, so take it all out, withthe proper paper and put the new plywood, then we have to put the stucco in there. i don't think it will happen overnight.á+'i either you give--you accept not them the abatement so she has enough time to hire finish the job, and i will follow th her and make sure that she--i'm a licensed contractor, but don't do construction anymore, but i rather help her outa bad situation, and i'm willing to time, free time for her to help

her. but this isn't going to happen overnight. >> just temporary weatherization- >> temporary isn't going to work. this is complicated situation that peoplget into it, but they don't know how to get out of it. in order to get out of it 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. building with one bathroom, how can three people live this is unacceptable to put this lady into so much-- >> the smallest house you can stay in the then the one in try ve [indiscernible] the neighborhood is nice and my house have to be nice. why you don't give me i don't like to have to my

house. this is my house. like i say, my mansion. it is what i work for so hard. right now i'm here try to [indiscernible] i'm so sorry. >> thank you. >> thank you. >> commissioner williams. for the appellate, sympathetic to your presenting us with a sounds 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? what is happening with the loan, because you are stating there needs to be enough time, 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? >> as st got involved and needed help, so i'm here to

help.follow with the-maybe the loan or something or see the job site and see whether we can get some contractor can come up with "ña reasonable price, if she get the loan. if you put the lien against the property she is not going to get the loan. basically,b that is what it is. contractor and get it started and keep the department informed that procedural going through, we call for inspection and i think this can be done, but as i said, it takes u are a expert in this, so much time? >> with the right money can take one or two months to do it, but wron it isn't going to happen. maybe 6 months. i say it would be done byáb mujts. months. >> director greene, how would that work with 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 the new lender between the department and new lender to have lien be subordinant to the lender lien? >> not 0ure of the innerworkings of the lender we agree to subordinate our loan. it a lot and not in this specific circumstance, but essentially a lender will make a request to the city to subordinate the lien, or there is a clause within the city lien 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 that is what i was wondering if there is a new lender. unless there is agreement they are subordinant to the prio

existing lien. yeah. >> absolutely. >> okay. from what i would be, we could-there needs to be some with the weathering, that can't just be left out there without doing anything with that. if the appellate is willing to do something for that, then i would be comfortable some additional time for the work to be completed without havingdown, but if it is not done within that time, then it has to go 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.i just 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 help l i can say.

>> okay. >> putting a lien against a property with this situation i don't think it will serve any pu it just make her worse then what it but, by cooperating with her, that nothing is impossible. find the right solution, then there should be no problem. i have done it before and this isn't going to be the one, but why put the against somebody? [indiscernible] >> to answer that would be to get action fo action initiated, which hasn't happened for many years, so 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 my in there to just help the process. i don't need anything to collect from her. >> i'm done. >> i have great you're going through, and i understand construction is complicated and difficult. it has been 12 years since the original notice of violati i can't imagine that it is healthy or safe for anybody to be occupying that space. recognize that that has been an additional fire danger to the neighborhood during that period as well asng the rest of your home at risk should that catch on fire in addition to mold, mildew, proofing issues, things that nature. you kn violation is to create urgency and moving forwaseem to have worked thus far. i don't how removing rward the process any quicker so

i'm inclined to uphold it. i think we can give more remedy. i don't know how other folks feel on--i dont know what the full assessment of cost for the lien or has it not --the full assessment of cost. >> it looks ke it is on page 28. >> representative, you can have a seat. thank you. you can have a seat.you. >> the outstanding balance is not the final, because they add up based on how long the case sit in division. with your authority or suwe can consider do some waver.

>> commissioner alexander-tut. l; >> so, what i'm hearing is that the biggest obstacle to this is not the facts, not the-there is no the code or the city's process, it is the lien. and getting that loan in order to do the work. so, i like to make a motion to put this in advance for 60 days. that gives you 60 days to get the loan and if the lien after the loan you have the loan and i continue the work. and so, that should solve your loan question, but also protect dbi and create that level of urgency so you do the work and protect 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 mean the order would not be in effect for-- hearing her? >> the order being in abeyance for 60 the order would not be issued in effect for that 60 days and my understanding is that means that they wouldn't even have-because the order is not yet in effect when they go seek out a loan, it would not be something thatlien on the property. >> i'm not inclined to give th period for the work to be done.nz i think there's-i'm very sympathetic, but i the balanced approach where we can both protect ncy and protect

the neighborhood as well as give you the space to hopefully move. >> uld like to point out that if the lien is put in place once the loan is they could be found in defaul that is also something to consider. >> i don't have a way to get that. >> that may be something be considered. >> not necessarily, but basically you could be found tion of your loan terms if a lien is placed on your property during the which you hold the loan. >> therefore obtaining the loto subordinate. >> in this circumstance, and this is-i think the would be easier to have--it would easier to obtain the loan without the lien, but should the lien go into

place after the loan is given that creates additional complications. that is not our problem to solve, but i'm just-i feel we should be aware of the way those things work. >> that is a important flag. >> i think athe solution-let us work with the department for 90 days. one more extra--we get started right d 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 more extra month. you can give us a-enough chance maybe sooner we can get it done, but we keep contact with the department and make sure every step of the wawe can work with the department. i have been doing it 30

something years, so i think we can work it out. >> thank you for the deliberation right now. >> i know, just trying to help. >> okay. it is a process. sorry about that. thanks. >> it sound to me like the hetic 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 since it has been over a decade that this has been unsafe, not only for you all, but for the neighborhood, so i am not quite sure what makes se move forward with. but open to ons. it sounds like perhaps putting the lien first--it is upfront cost, might be easier way to obtain the loan and not default, but if somebody else has a different solution

i'm open. >> i like the ti days, something to initiate some action and i cooperation with the department and this there was some cooperation with the department. i dont know if there is something--within obeyance, with enforcement if that would be different from just continuing this hearing for 60 days and saying we'll continue this for 60 days, you co if it is not done, we will just enforce this thing. i dont know--to me that might simpler, but that creates a risk if a fi i recommend in that time the appellate takes measures to make sure it becomes--the some action needs to be taken. at get the financing for the work, that needs to away or at least progress needs to be shown. that is my positi i think with the lien i would understand how that can create

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 remind everyone[÷ th motion to uphold the order of abatement and hold in obeyance for 60 days if there is a second after the discussion. >> this may be a friendly amendment, inof enforcement that it just be continuance of this hearing for 60 days. >> commissioner sommer-- >> [indiscernible] i think in-i think i agree with a lot of things been said. everyone is sympathet blg. ic. it is hard wh you have poor construction and bunch of circumstances, i hear you. i e difficulty from the board and department is the timeframe.

we are talking about a order of abatement from now ago, however the issue that created was order of abatement from 10 years for that or 8 years before that, which is a challenge. why hasn't it been addressed in that time? i can guess. i also have two kids. however, i think it makes it challenging. in summary, sortof a bunch of options that are all erful, i would go with alexander-tut proposed to hold abeyance for that still says that we are-there is still notice of violation, it is still pending to be enforced and will be enforced 60 days, but you can get your loan without the lien. >> are we saying that in 60 day obeyance we need to see a start of work?

yeah? >> and then what- >> 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 whatever and however long-is there a guarantee we won't be here 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 th60 days-it needs to be completed in 60 days we know it won't and that means the adorder of abatement would be recorded in 60 days, basically? and so you can in the meantime. >> and hope [indiscernible] >> right. i don't know how that works i suppose.

i are don't know if i have a good solution. >> i don't know much about lending laws, but it does seem as though even if they were to 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 i would know not a lot about lending laws, but have to disclose anyway, that there is a risk of order of abatement. it is a material fact, and >> construction insurance that has to be put into place as well. >> right. >> i just like to clarify for the board, there is a existing order of abratement from the 2012, so they have to go through the subordination

process with us anyway. so perhaps we uphold 9hthe current order. are you seconding the moti >> i'm not, because-- >> cou like to amend or-- >> yeah. i just want to share the thinking. i dont want to have this again. have the conversation again is what i anticipate happening. e here in september i don't expect anything to change and we will same set of facts before us, the same difficult decision, so i want ng is to i would lean one of two and interested hearing the longer that we think the work should be completed in, and i can't predict all the ins and outs of somebody else's financing and don't think that is the t so i could either

extend it to the what we think if it is-6 months feels long to me and ll what will be rainy season that is black-out whatever--upholding so i like to see what the rest of commission is-- sing fees, because it seems like the financial piece has been the largest barrier and when we talking about the quoted price we heard was 50, 60 thousand dollars and fees that are probably 10 percent that cost.can make a larger impact $gwe feel like we want able to

move forward more quickly. >> commissioner shaddix. >> thank you. i know there is not a best solution in all this, but leaning also towards upholding and i'm liking the additional 60 days, but a strange feeling we will be back in 60 da doing this so leaning more towards upholding. >> i have to agre6ce i am leaning towards upholding. curious what options we in terms of financial are there wavers or things we can do that that regard? >> i think they can wave the fees. that's fine. >> so, there are two separate motions potentially. one, whether to uphold or reverse or put the order of ance and then the second would be with respect to assessment of costs. >> seperal motion. make 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 uphold the order of abatement? >> yes. not the 60 days? okay. there is a motion to iuphold the order of abatement and is there a second? >> second. >> okay. the motion is by president chavez and second by vice president neumann. do a roll call vote on the motion.ç÷í president chavez, yes. -turn crophones, please. sorry. vice president neumann, yes. commissioner meng, yes. commissioner shaddix, yes. commissioner sommer, yes. commissioner williams, yes. the motion carries unanimously. and theris a second motion. >> i like to open discussion to

wave the fees >> so, this second motion is to wave the assessment of costs? >> is there a second? >> i wanted iscussion first-- >> excuse me? >> open for discussion. >> okay. >> i am inclined to oppose, because this is every appeal hearing says there is a hardship never a case where everyone says the fees are fine.y what 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 trbut not inclined to reduce the fees. >> want to remind the board about the h@to hear appeals regarding issuance of final of cost imposed persundt to section 102a showing substantial error by

>> if there is no othe comments, then i'll close discussion and leave it at we already decided. >> [indiscernible] open motion right now? >> there was a k4first, there was no second. she said she wanted to open for discussion. >> i'll withdraw. >> she with drawing the motion. >> the first motion was withdrawn and your new motion is to uphold the t? >> 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, sipre vice president neumann, yes. commissioner alexander-tut, yes. commissioner meng, yes. commissioner shaddix, yes.mmissioner sommer, yes. commissioner williams, yes.

motion carries unanimously. thank you. next we are on item d, new appeals 5w order of abatement case 6926, 2121 laguna street. owners of record & appellant: catherine siler. action requested by appellant: appellant appeals the june 28, 2022 order of abatement and assessment of costs aned fire hose cabinet approval as a prerequisite to obtain permit.” appellant seeks “removal ofbate to non-board member or agent.” appellant also request for jurisdiction on the ground that their “permit application is waiting for dbi approval.” heir “permit application is waiting for dbi approval.”inspector ing, would -like to >> this is going to >> yes. >> thank you. now we'll begin the last case.

appeacase number 6926. property 2121 laguna street. lot number, 019. the properfour story building in construction for ltifamily residential building in r2 occupancy. [indiscernible] dbi issuedin 2018 and 2019 after receiving two anonymous complaints from the member of about there [indiscernible] building parking garage. the nov was closed as it was found to be a this violation refer to code enforcement november 2018. an order of abatement issued june 2022 the hearing officer. today, over 6 years fre first nov date back in february 2018, however the not been completed with dbi final

inspection sign off. the property owner obtained a permit approval in january, 2023 and attend to comply with olation, however, this permit still has not been completed m÷with inspection to date. staff recommendation, uphold the order of abatement, including assessment of cost. the nov isin 2018, the owner failed to comply with the the timeline. four years after the first nov date, thabatement issued june 2022. to date, over two years has elapseof abatement date, however the violation still g. 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 this situation and to go through the history what happened, and bring everybody up to date on where the project is now. so, i got into the-looked into all the minutia going to 2018 when the first nov was filed. that was in february 22, and they subsequentially there was a permit application with dbi submitted in february 27, 2020 and the permit was issued january the 5 of 2023, and i have the permit number if you the work was to mitigate that situation with that retaining wall in july-sorry, yeah, ímjuly of-that's not correct. it is july of 2023 and

completed september 2023. rainbow water proofing and restoration, that was the general contr the structural engineer on the job was hy burr and curry and then the-i dont know ifet into some of the details of this. when you do a like that, it involves concrete and retaining walls you have to have special inspections and special inspector who is independent of the owner goes out and makes sure all the concrete work performed was performed to th that company was applied materials and engine so, the work was done, it was completed. the inspections took place that permit issued. ame submittedthe special inspection group which is part of d bi. there are two pieces that and one of my criticisms of this, what should have the general contractor

should have followed up and made sure those inspections were to dbi, however, the ame maintains all the reports and special inspections issues and i talked to inspector ing about this, ther is two issues, one involved shot creek, a process used instead of pouring the concrete it was shot-if you want to look like a gun concrete, so that negated the one report that the special inspection group requires, and the other was, regarding how the concrete was cored and the was done negates the requirement for a second issue or second requirement that the special inspection group has.all this down, now working with and the genera we have to go back and sit down with

the inspector, over the counter inspector get his approval for these two i? were 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.k+-ñissues hanging up that permit, but the work was done and i looked at it, it was done in a quality fashion. we had some pretty reputable players in contractor 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 fina we are working with-i talked to joseph ing this week and we are all on same page of what has to happen to %mget these two inspections that on the inspection

group uses, to get those o] a back up if they have questions. thank you. next there is public comment. any public comment on this item? seeing none in person, is there any remotely? seeing none. next, rebuttal. is there staff rebuttal? >> again, we are here today to discuss if the order of abatement is issued correctly and nov issued correctly. the building foundation detearated so requires repair, so that is whnov is issued correctly. the order of abatement is back in june 28, 2022 and as of to date they still cannot

get the permit final. the order abatement is correct. even those correction are before order abatement issued and there is the appellate informed me they tried to revise it, they need to submit new permit application to have the dbi engineer apor can be revxised, so, that's my rebuttal. thank you. pellate have rebuttal? okay. >> there is reference ew from page 15 of my repor shows the status of the inspection and current inspection was performed by g third party and it is still outstanding, so please review page 15. >> th appellate? >> i have in my hand here a copy of application and that

shows it was submitted and finally issued in 2023, and document here from ame that they submitted to dbi in which they addressed those two issues remaining to be signed off by dbi in order to finalize . i'm under the impression, piecing this together that a permit was issued and the work was done. went in in 2020 and my understanding wasn't issued until 2023 because of the process-approval have to take place to get the permit issued. thsomething that is strange to me, because i do a lot of work in san francisco and there u is a approval process that takes time, so that permit was issued according to this document i have, this copy h: of the dbi permit, it was issued in 2023, and the work was in july of

2023. and then i have the applied materials engineering letter here that is dated, of 16, 2023 in which they addressed these issues that are still open today. these two report issues that the special inspections office is lookg for. what has to have happened, which should have happenewhen that letter was submitted, a meeting called with dbi, meet with the over the counter inspector an]3have those two points or those two checkpoints addressed and authorize the fact that they were not necessary because of the process used to do the constructi in my mine it isr a ing, and it was some pretty sloppy, if i

want to be super critical, sloppy in the sense #> it should have been done immediately and this is kind of dragged on. but, when i do a lot of construction work like i say in san francisco and in my mind this is not a major . 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 the construction and show that those two items not necessary. >> thank you. the board can deliberate. >> before we start on deliberation, can you remind what being-what we are reviewing today? i feel i heard a few different things that are up for contest. it that the--yes. i'm asking our staff.

>> they are appealing the the order of abatement. >> generally? >> generallwe haven't completed the permit? >> the paperwork issue there is structural observation letters when submitted by the engineer of record. generally we work with t me back up. structural observation is required whether the engineer of record submit plants and the plan checker approves or not and going forward that is a mthe permit. structural obsethe engineer saying there are two required and haven't received the record and still waiting for those. the appellate is saying-whether they use [indiscernible] we have special inspection from that, /qthere are two other items one just general concrete constructis for the to view the location of the steel prior to drilling of

the dowels for specific detail. we have never gotten that letter 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 with engineer of record. >> we are missing a couple documents? >> yes. >> okay. that's really helpful. thank you. commissioner williams. >> just a question for mr. caruso. referencing permits documents you have, you have copies? >> i have just the one in my hand. >> we 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 have it? >> that is the permit you are speaking-- >> this is actually-- td

>> this is the information on the and when it was issued, correct? we are curious whether or nohave the inspection documents. >> which documents? >> the documents about the special inspection. >> i have this letter from-- they refer to the shot creek and rebar. the way they attack that wall, they broke it down so they didn't touch any of the rebar, so they could see

the put the shot crete on and why they are maintaing two issues are not german particular project. i'm confident when they do have this meeting with z=the special inspection group that it is going to be accepted. >> commissioner williams, 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 be irrelevant whether or not these things are solved at this 2?exac i have been in this before, you submit a project and has requirements and changes and go back and talk about deand revise it. it sounds like everything was done, it sounds like the last piec happen, that's fine. that is sort of irspective of the notice of violation issue which

is from 2i guess. this is what is throwing me a bit. somebody and said unsafe condition. can you fix this? they did. they got plans , fixed everything. it isn't totally signed off. the notice of violation is for what? there was a unsafe condition and it days to be remediated'.? >> my understanding it was two anonymous calls, which i think-not sure of this, but i of them was one of the hoa member. >> maybe this is all irrelevant. >> anyway, they called in and said there is this problem with this retaining wall. >> sure. >> that was the violation. now, i think there was-go ahead. +g >> 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 to fix this. that is your what notice of

vit is the first contact? >> the building department received phone call from member of the public, so we went out to do investigation and confirm and this is accurate. we issued nov to make it enforceable to make the owner repair work. if they don't then we move forward schedule. they still not lf [indiscernible] >> got it. okay. >> i also want to--so called other special inspection requirement under my report, page 16, screening or scanning rebar, important to avoid damage in the existing rebar inside- >> sure, but that is all between the e, tg is on the form, somebody has to address it. place somebody needs to explain why and say why is

okay. somebody called in a complaint, notice 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 in the timeline designated oen the noting of violation,order of abatement, right? >> there is more history to that. they had a hearing in july 2022 and we gave them continuance there. and they got another continuance on in december 2022. >> so it has taken too long? we are not meeting the timelines agreed and extensions were provided cephal >> yes, we worked with them about the order of abatement officer said this is enough and issued the order of abatement. >> to me, all these things can be true that it was repaired and permit is close to being closed out and there was notice of violation and order abatement was appropriately issued in accordance with procedures and unsafe condition, right?

>> correct. >> 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 an 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 time, the director or whom ever the agreement was, it didn't get done in that teamline timeline and whether that legitimate or not, i can't say, but it did not. >> two continuances. >> two continuances, so-to me i think it is unfortunately and 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 ñe the entire building or 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 you. i will make a motion to uphold the order of abatement. >> second. motion by commissioner sommer to uphold the order of abatement. is there a second? >> commissioner alexander-tut. >> second by commisander-tut. okay. , so we'll do roll president chavez, yes. vice presid commissioner alexander-tut, yes. commissioner meng, yes.

commissioner shaddix, yes. commissioner sommer, yes. commissioner williams, yes. the motion passes unanimously. general public comment. sorry. >> i believe is also assessment of cost issue. since it is not the last motion, you should have another motion on [indiscernible] >> is there a motion to uphold the 5tassessmeost? >> also a motion to uphold the assessment of cost. >> there is a motion by seconded by commissioner alexander-tut to uphold assessment of costs. on that motion. president chavez yes. vice president neumann, yes. commissioner alexander-tut, yes. commissioner meng, yes. commissioner shaddix, yes. commissioner sommer yes. commissioner williams, yes. the carries unanimously. go to item

d, general public comment. memberoffs the pud7blic may address the board on matters within the board's jurisdiction and not y's agenda. any tement appeal said board? seeing none in person, non remo item e is adjournmentf. is there a motion to adjourn? >> so motioned. >> is there a second? >> second. >> we are now adjourned. it is-all commissioners are in favor of being adjourned.a.m. we will take a brief, 5, 10 recess and reconvene as the building inspection commission. [meeting adjourned] ós

>> when o'shaughnessy dam opened 1923, there was a grand celebration achievement of ensuring san francisco's new water supply but it was the beginning of a unique collaboration between the city of san francisco and yosemite national park. >> lands around the dam are critically important. we along with the park service have a very common goal thereof protection of that watershed, both for national park values and water supply values inmite is the cub tree's

premiere national park visited by millions of visitors but the protection of our watershed and the city provides significant outside funding for the national park, over $8 million a year is for trail maintenance and wilderness education and park operations aurity keeping the water safe haven. >> one hundred years ago when the dam was first builte was a different view of the environment back then than there dam was part of changing that view across the an importance to our work here at o'shaughnessy manage this dam and manage our releases and the environment downstream it's very important to san francisco that we need that challenge. >> for 100 years o'shaughnessy dam and the park service ensured the bay area has clean water, much our natural resources. >> this o'shaughnessygo.

>> shop and dine the 49 promotes local businesses and changes san franciscans to do their shopping and dooipg within the 49 square miles by supporting local services within the neighborhood we help san francisco remain unique successful and vibrant where will you shop and dine the 49 a ms. medina

>>good morning. today is wednesday july 17,

2024. regular meeting of the building inspection commission.to remind everyone to please mute yourself if you are on the agenda is roll call. president alexander-tut, here. vice president shaddix, here. oz commissioner chavez, here. commissioner meng here. commissioner neumann, here. commissioner sommer, here. commissioner williams, here. we have