abatement appeals board.ng of i like to remine everyone to mute yourself if you are not speaking and is roll call. president chavez, present. vice president neumann, here. commissioner alexander-tut, here. commissioner meng, here. mmissioner shaddix, here. commissioner sommer, here. commissioner williams, here. we have a quorum. next is land acknowledgment. >> the abatement appeals board, we acknowledge that we are on the unceded ancestl ohlone who are the original inhabitants of the san francisco peninsula. as the indigenous stewards of this land and in accordance with thr

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 living and working on their traditional homeland. we wish to pay our respects by acknowledging the ancestors and relatives of the ramaytush community and by affirming their 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 then 6924 be following. next, i like to read the oath.

will all parties giving testimony today please stand and raise your right hand? about to give is the truth to the best of your knowledge? thank you, you may beeate. next for members of the public that may be listening in, the public comment call-in number is access code, 26641793778. to raise your hand for public comment on a specific item, press star 3 when prompted by the moderator and the webex password is 0717. and then also for the parties that are js here to present today, the department will present their report first, and then the appellate.

the department has seven minutes and then next the appellate has seven minutes. after that, there will be the public comment and then each side has three minutes rebuttal time. our next agenda item is item b, approval of minutes. discussion and possible action to adopt the minutes for special meeting held on june 12, 2024. >> so moved. >> there was a motion by 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. >> any opposed? thank you. the minutes are approved.

next going to read agenda item case 6925 201 ashten avenue. owner and appellate emberton. action requested by appellant: appellant appeals the april 12, 2023 order of abatement and assessment of cost appellant request the board to rescind and reverse the dbi violation notices (the notice of violation and order of abatement). appellant has also ated that the “removal of blight was completed prior to nov.” >> [microphone not on. unable to hear speaker] the appellate was timely in submission, but we failed to properly post her brief and to distribute to 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 aware and she is still present if you like to ask her. >> okay. hi. >> you may come forward to the microphone. >> hi. hi.!a so, as matthew said, we have not received all your 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 to move forward today without all of the materials? >> i think continuing the case to make sure everyone can take a look at all the information is most appropriate. 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.

>> second. >> there was a motion. who did the second? commissioner the motion by president chavez and second by vice president neumann and i'll do roll call vote on th chavez, yes. neumann, yes. alexander-tut, yes. meng, yes. shaddix, yes. sommer, yes. williams, yes. thank you, the motion carries unanimously. our apologies again for that. ne item is c1. case number 6924. 204 tingley street. owner of record and rangel

samuel and ahmad larizadeh action requested by appellant: appellant appeals the order of abement 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. appellant has argued that “no lien is bestowed on subject propergóty: 204 tingley st. city of sf destroyed plans/app in 2020. due to hardship, permit was not processed in time of director's hearing. duplicate is being processed now with the city of sf.” and, staff--sorry, the staff will present first and then you'll present. senior inspector. >> good morning to everyone,

and building inspection commission. joe ing, senior building inspector. i'm here for department of building inspection and appeal case the agenda as one case just removed. continued case with appeal case mber 6924, property address, 204 tingley street. block number 6782, t number, 021. the property is a one story building in construction for a single family use--[indiscernible] of the case from ■÷ last hearing. [indiscernible] dbi building inspector review and authorize rear addition being construct [indiscernible]

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, abatement issd in february, due to the owner fail to comply with the code violation within the timeline. the order of abatement issued with the following condition:obtain permit and complete all required correction work, including final inspection to comply with the nov and for all code enforcement fees. following is permit and activity.

june 2023the owner obtained a permit approval to correct the violation. that permit is also the only permit the owner applied to address the violation, however, this permit has not been completed with dbi final inspection as of today. 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 reviewed multiple construction deficiency the owner required to make correction and reschedule for reinspection. recommendation, uphold the order of assessment of cost due to ■(nov issued based on th site inspection findingment the order of abatement issued propertyly

february 2023 due to thto obtain permit until june 2023, which was four months after th abatement issued. the owner to complete the corrective work, however, the owner failed inspection due to the completed work deviated from the approved plan and not complied with the building code. the building exterior increased the fire hazard. that conclude my presentation. the appellate may co >> my name is ahmad, the project sponsor. what they say not complete true. what you hear here, something is non sauns. we applied the permit a long time ago.

the person who wassupposed to be a hold of her.in jail and by the time i figureed it out, i pulled a new permit and the permit was issued. he knows tha 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, but he is deported to mexico, so there is no way they could get a hold of him or me, because she didn't know what to do. finally, i got involved with at, 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 got the money

from her and i'm a licensed contractor and i the building so you can see what is going on. first of all, whoever has been hired to put the plywood without the proper paper for black paper for water protection. they use the wrong plywood. this is exterior of the window. top, used corrugated plastic on top of the rosee, not even-not supposed to be there.k let me show-this is exrior of the plywood. as you can see, it is already

deteriorated and are it is not supposed to be. this kind of material is 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, theyuse the same material and with the corrugated roofing. it is not going to protect anything. what it is, she has to start all over again, which means 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, so she started-she is some contractor. $140 thousand estimate she got to do that. i don't think she is able to get the loan to fix this problem. all we are asking--

>> especially with lien- >> if you put the lien against the property, she might lose the building. >> i already been through a lot of trouble since the 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, which one time i came to the building to check the rmit and they say they lost the drawings. remember? >> exactly. the drawing has been lost twice in a row. >> then i say, why this happening to me? i remember i was crying because why everything happening to me you first person steal the money, a lot of

money, and second, they the drawings again, and don't know, everything--i am asking why it is so complicated and i try to do the right way, but every time i contact somebody, it is steal the money and right now, we ■ already change the-the material was showing with good one.the bette just--i am here because i want my house to be finished to complete, because it is my house for more i have been living there. not in the best condition,

but-- it is my mansion. that is all i can say. i am because-i'm sorry. >> i think this is conclude our presentation. >> thank you. >> thank you. >> is there any public comment on this agenda item? is there any remotely? then, next we have rebuttal. staff can come forward. >> the appellate--cannot finish

the project in time as of today, and the next option they may consider is remove the unauthorized rear addition, and restore to the last legal condition. that's it. >> and does the appellate have rebuttal? >> i thk this is not going to work. we are not going to remove it. we are not staying the same thing. this lady has two kids and can't afford to live 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 the addition to this ropey. unfortunately she getting into bad contractor and sh's money and she's been going on for so long i think there is no way we can remove it. the thing is, we have done, but

it is not done properly. she has to go through it, she will go throug i would rather you guys not lien the property so she can get a loan and that's my last word. i'm not going to city say remove it, no. she's not going to remove it. >> no. and i want to mention, they keep saying i add room, i add extra space in my house, but it is not adding. when i buy this house like years ago or so in 1994, the house was already extended like in the same-- >> square footage. >> yeah, but we tried to make it new because the

already old. stroyed, so we tried to fix betterbut all this--i don't know what did wrong, but we never saw all this trouble was going to 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 to destroy my house where i vefo been living in san francisco for more then 30 years, and i been working for this property and i tried to fix it. i not try to destroy my house. >> to honor the person that constructed in the building and ancestors

that lived in it. that built it. do not want to destroy it, i want build it better. because there is the home of my children and my own where i have been raised, because i ar that house when i was very young and want to conserve it. but it is better condition so live there. because we have a right to live in a house that is appropriate to live in and asyou all know, we want a warm loving home with a bathroom and good conditions for us to [6liv

in. and for my continue living there, and i do not want to destroy this homeand that's the reason i'm here, so you can me to remove this lien and not to have the doors closed so i can continue living in my thank you. >> thank you for your consideration. >> thank you.members deliberation. >> commissioner williams. >> before deliberating, i suppose the question i have for staff is, what is the-if there is and there is, what is

the present danger to public health and safety with the condition of the property? in the first page of the materials unsafe 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 the neighborhood. >> 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.most recent permit. >> they only have one permit on file and there issued back in-the record show in june 2023, and they start doing work and you can see exhibit i, which show the inspection histy. they did get additional inspection from last hearing. it was june 17 and the following day scheduled for inspection. they have multiple deficiency not comply with the building code and approved

plan. you can find the page on page 13 of the report, and which in red on the top. 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 forwardbut the work been done and everybody agrees it is substandard. it creates-it is not protecting the actual 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 de■ocision in front of you. we already have a existing order of abatement from 2012. if we do choose to upho order and they do go for a loan, wea

subordinate precaution and subordinate the lien to any lender. pretty standard process. >> can you bring the mic forward? could you talk about the subordination process more? >> sure. basically we are telling the owner come in and ask to subordinate the order the lien, which takes precedence. normally i believe government liens take precedence over all others and banks are less with those there, but we have a process if ey agree to set the money aside to make the repairs, will lower-trying to think of another word, subordinate our order to bottom of the list and the protection the city has is there is aside in escrow to make the repairs, but it allows the property owner to go ahead and obtain

financing. >> that is very helpful. thank you for that. just o--i have a question about the case itself. the first page it says weathering, but we heard a lot about the permit talks about-the description of the permit and instruction history goes beyond permitting and what we heard from the also the scope goes beyond weathering. to just before us-if they were weather, like do the weathering, ■#would that complete the notice of violation? i'm confused about what isin front of us.

>> this photo captured in 2012, 12 year ago, this rear addition is unauthorized. that exposed roof frrotected from fire, not only just weather. so, in case a fire happen, it will increase the fire hazard and quicker and strong. >> you will be able to come back in just a moment. >> this photo captured recently in june 18 and also july. they remain unchanged. you can see the roof is also unprotected with like

plexiglass or plastic material on the top. ■ >> so, the-are we hearing both this is a violation or just hearing the one dated march 2, 2021 that talks abou i can clarify that. the illegal work was done in 2012 and have order of abatement for the illegal addition. the notice of violation is they failed to weather proof it over the 12 years, and it creates a hazard. this notice of violation is for the weather proofing.you have the o the violation about illegal construction, it just took so long to get the permit to move forward that it created additional hazard, so today we are only hearing about the weather proofing. unfortunately, it was my hope they could go out and actually weather proof this and we could away,

but the underlying construction is substandard so they can't put a roof and siding on top of it, because the the frame needs to be replaced. i suppose if you wanted to order temporary weather proofing while the work is being moved forward. i think that would be equitable solution. >> so, i would-thank you everyone for the time. i am curious about the suppdepa the appellate. if we-would you be able to accept temporary weatherizing while the rest of the work is being done? is that something you can do and hoto do? >> you want the paement appellate to come for withered? forwd? >> yes.

this isn't a easy job. you are dealing with something that has been done, wrongly done, so we have to take it all out, with the proper paper and put the new plywood, then we have to put the stucco in there. i don't think it happen overnight.ither you give--you a giving them the abatement so she has enough time hire regular, reasonable contractor to and i will follow with her and make sure that she--i'm a licensed contractor, but don't do construction anymore, but i rather help her out because it is a bad situation, and i'm willing to put my 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 complicated situation that people get into it, but they don't how to get out of it. in order to get out of it you need money and if you don't money, one person with two kids, i don't think she can do it. unless she win the lotto or something and can move out of the place. first of all, it is too small. small bed room, corner building with one bathroom, how can three people live in it, i don't know. this is unacceptable to put this lady into so much-- >> the smallest house you can stay in the neighborhood, and then the one in really bad shape. we try to havend the neighborhood is nice and my house have to be nice.

why you don't give me a chance? i don't like to have to demolish my house. this is my house. like i say, it is my mansion. it is what i work for so hard. right now i'm here to try to [indiscernible] i'm so sorry. >> thank you. >> thank you. >> commissioner williams. >> for the appellate, sympathetic to your case, but you're presenting us with a position in which it sounds li you want to keep the addition without removing it, but you are not presenting any- >> solution. >>ah, so what is the timeline and solution? what is happening with the loan, because you are stating there

needs to be enough time, but with our presented, there has been time, so what is the plan? what is the solutionwe can have something to work with? >> as i said, i just got involved in that, because--she came to me and needed help, so i'm here to help. but, i will follow5! with the-maybe the loan or something or see the job site and see whether we with a reasonable price, if she can get the loan. if you put the lien against the property she is not going to get the loan. that is what it is. >> right. >> we get the loan and contractor and get it started and keep the building department informed that procedural wise going through, we call for inspection and i think this can be done, but as i said, it takes time. >> you are a this, so

much time? >> with the right money two months to do it, but wrong money, it isn't going to happen. maybe 6 months. i say 6 months it would be done by 6 mujts. months. >> director greene, how would that work with the new lender, because my understanding would be that existing liens on the property-the city could agree to have the new liens to be subordinant to the older liens, but how-would there be an agreement with the new lender between the department and new lender to have the city lien be subordinant to the lender lien? >> not sure of the innerworkings of the lender but we to subordinate our loan. >> typically because i deep with it a lot 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 set circumstances, and then the lender-it gets recorded as a subordinant, so that is the order entities can collect the money, should there be a default. >> yeah. yeah. fiinright so that is what i was wondering if there is a new lender. unless there is agreement they are subordinant to the prior existing lien. yeah. yep. olutely. >> okay. alright. from what i heard, my position would be, we could-there needs to be some sort of accommodation to deal 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 providing some 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 has to go down, to be enforcement. so, for the appellate--if that were the position, would that be feasible? >> as i , id the money. i just got involved. i tried to whether she can get some loan or something or m>3.nd reasonable contractor to come up the solution. i promise i can help her out. that's all i can say. >> okay. >> putting a lien against a property with this situation i don't think it will serve any purpose.

it just make her worse then what it is now. by cooperating with her, that could be done. nothing is impossible. once we the right solution, then there should be no problem. i have done it before and this isn't going to be the last one, but why put the lien againsso? [indiscernible] >> to answer that question, the len would be to get action for corrective action initiated, whichasn't happened for many years, so that 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 solution is. >> we are coming up with solution.months and see whether we can get it done within 6 months.

as i said, i put my time and effort in the to just help the process. i don't need anything to collect from her. >> i'm done. >> i have great sympathy for what you're going through, and i understand that construction is complicated and difficult. it has been 12 years since the original notice of violation. i can't imagine that it is healthy or safe for anybody to be occupying that space. i also want to recognize that that has been an additional fire danger to the neighborhood during that period as well as putting the rest of your sh. in addition to mold, mildew, water proofing issues, things that nature. you know, the notice of violation is to create urgency and moving

forward and it doesn't seem have worked thus far. i don't see how removing it moves forward e process any quicker and so i'm inclined to uphold it. i can give more time to remedy. i don't know how other folks feel on--i dont knthe full assessment of cost for the lien or has it not been--the full assessment of cost. >> it looks like it is on page 28. >> representative, you can have a seat. thank u. you can have a seat. thank you. >> the outstanding balance is

around 4 thousand something, but that is not the final, because they add up based on how long the case sit in our division. with your authority or suggestion, we can consider do so waver. >> commissioner alexander-tut. the biggest obstacle to this is not the ■q facts, not the-there is no disagreement about the code orthe city's process, it is the lien. and getting that loan in order to do 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 goes into place 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 neighborhod=od and the house. that is my suggestion that we put the abeyance and to the attorney, could you explain what that means for the commission? >> putting in abeyance for 60 days would just mean the order would not be effect for-- >> are you not hearing her? >> the ■horder being in abeyanc for 60

days means the order would not be issued in effect for that 60 days and my undethat 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 that a lien on the property. >> i'm not inclined to give the entire period for the work to be done. i think ther sympathetic, but i think this is the can both protect the department, create urgency and protect the neighborhood as well as give you the space to hopefully move. >> i would like to point out that if the lien is put in place once the loan is in place they could be found in default. that is also something to i don't have a way to get

around that. >> that may be something that--to be considered. >> not necessarily, but basically you could be found in violation of your loan terms if a lien is placed on your property during the period in which you hold the loan. >> therefore obtaining the loan--if you ask to subordinate. j >> in this circumstance, and this isuld be easier tould easi 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 important flag.

>> i think maybe the solution-letus work with the department for 90 days. one more extra--we get started right now and we keep contact with them to see what the loan is all about. once we get the loan, obviously we dont wanto put the-it goes to the lien, it 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 make sure every step of the way we 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 suggestion, but they are doing deliberation right now. >> i know, just trying to help. >> okay. is a process. sorry about that.

thanks. >> it sound to me like the board is sympathetic 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 that this has been unsafe, not only for you all, but for the neighborhood, so i sure what ma sense to move forward with. but open to other suggestions. it sounds like perhaps putting the lien first--it is upfront cost, might be easier way to obtain the loan and not put at risk of desfault, but if somebody else has a different solution, i'm open.

>> i like the timeframe, 60 days, something to initiate some action and it sounds like there will be is cooperation with the department and prior to this there was some cooperation with the department. i dont know if there g--within 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 come back and if it is not done, we will just enforce this thing. me that might sound simpler, but that creates a risk if a fire happens within 60 days. i recommend in that time the appellate takes measures to make sure it becomes--the some action needs to be taken. whatever needs to be done to get the financing for the work, that needs to be done right away or at least

progress needs to be shown. that is my position on it. i think léwith the lien i would understand how that can create somthe financing, but i don't know if this st. the right solution or not. these are my thoughts on it. >> [indiscernible] >> just remind everyone there is a 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, instead of an abeyance of 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 when you have poor constructionan. i think the difficulty from the board and departmt is the timeframe. we are talking about a order of abatement from now three years ago, ver the issue that created was order of abatement from 10 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, sort of a bunch of options that are all not wonderful, i would go with what commissioner alexander-tut prosed hold abeyance for 60 days. that still says that we are-there is still notice of violation, it is still pending to be enforced and will

be enforced in 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? ye >> and then what- >> then the lien doesn't go into place, they just start working to remedy the nov. >> then-okay. so if it is not--if that e work whatever and however long-is there a guarantee we won't be here again from that action? >> no. ■ >> not really. >> none of it guarantees. aur] >> that is true. but i suppose-■o-that's why it normally to completion, right? the order of abatement, you have to be completed to not have order of abatement. >> uh-huh. >> then you know it is taken care of.

i think if we say mé60 days-it needs to be completed in 60 days we know it at means the order of abatement would be recorded in basically? and so you can get your loan in the meantime. >> and hope [indiscernible] >> right. i don't know how that ■■sworks 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 order of abatement that 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 order is issued. i would think that--again, i

know not a lot about lending laws, but this is something they may ■úhave to disclose anyway, that there is a risk of order of abatement. it is a material fact, and so--again- >> construction insurance that s to be put into place as well. >> right. to clarify for the board, there is a existing order of abratement froma" the 2012, so they have to go through the subordination process with us anyway. >> got it. so perhaps we uphold the current order. are you seconding the motion? >> i'm not, because-- >> commissioner alexander-tut, would you like to and or-- >> yeah. i just want to share the thinking. i dont want to have this again. i don't want to have the conversation

again in two months and that is what i anticipate happening. if we are here in september i don't expect anything to change and we will have the same set of facts before us, the same difficult decision, so i want to--my thinking is to avoid that. i would lean one of two ways and interested hearing the commission, obeyance that is longer that we think the work should be completed , and i can't predict all of the ins and outs somebody else's financ and don't think that is the commission's purview either, but so i could either extend it to the what we think if 3'it is months feels long to me and getting into hope fall season

so that is black-oufor construction. whatever--say 6 months or upholding so i like to see what the rest of the commission is-- >> i'm leaning toward■z upholdi the order. i think i would be more open to discussing 9éfe seems like the financial piece has been we talking about tnthe quoted price we hea was 50, 60 thousand doar that are probably 10 percent that cost. i think that is where we can make larger impact if we feel like we want to assist in this being able to move forward more quickly. ge >> commissioner shaddix.

>> thank you. i know there is not a best solution in all this, but i'm leaning also towards upholding and i'm liking what i'm hearing though. the additional 60 days, but i have a strange feeling we will be back in 60 days doing this so le upholding. >> i have to agree i am leaning towards upholding. curious what options we have in terms of financial considerations? are there wavers or things we can do that might be helpful in that rerd? >> i think they can wave the fees.cv that's fine. >> so, there are two separate motions potentially. one, whether to uphold or reverse or put the order of abatement in obeyance, and then the second would be with respect to assessment of costs. >> seperal motion.

separate motion. first make a motion óto uphold and then-- - [multiple speakers] j. >> correct. >> i like to make a motion ■é >> i want to be--so, your motion is to uphold the order of abatement? >> yes. >> so not the 60 days? okay. there is a motion to uphold the order abatent and is there a second? >> second. >> okay. the motion chavez and second by vice president neumann. do a roll call vote on the motion. president chavez, yes. -turn on your microphones, please. sorry. vice president neumann, yes. commissioner alexander-tut, yes. commissioner meng, yes. commissioner shaddix, yes. commissioner sommer, commissioner williams, yes.

the motion carries unanimously. and then there is a second motion. >> i like to open the fees. >> so, this second motion is ts >> yes. >> is there a second? >> i wanted to open discussion first-- >> excuse me? >> okay. or discussion. >> i am inclined to oppose, because this every appeal hearing says there is a hardship andb never a case where everyone says the fees are fine. that is generally what people are concerned about and i don't is a metric for deciding who is worthy and worthy of how to make that decision, so i am extremely sympathetic and try to find a way forward, but not inclined to reduce the fees.

>> also, i want to remind the board bout the standard is that, to hear appeals regarding issuance of final bill for assessment of cost imposed persundt to section 102a showing substantial error by the department. other comments, then i'll close discussion and leave it at what we already decided. >> [indiscernible] >> is there an open motion right now? >> there was a first, there was no second. she said she wanted to open up for discussion. >> i'll withdraw. >> she is with drawing the motion >> the first motion was withdrawn and your new motion is to uphold the assessment of cost?

>> yes. >> the there is a by president chavez to uphold assessment of cost. is there a second? >> second. >> there is a second by commissioner alexander-tut. roll call vote on the motion, president chavez, yes. vice president neumann, yes. commissioner alexander-tut, yes( commissioner meng, yes. commissioner shaddix, yes. commissioner sommer, yes. commissioner williams, yes. motion carries unanimously. thank you. next we are on item d, new appeals order of abatem6926, 2121 laguna street.

owners of record & appellant: catherine siler. action requested by appel: 2022 order of abatement and assessment of costs and re-hearing. appellant states that “sffd plan check released firete to obtain permit.” appellant seeks “removal of abatement status,” and argues that the “notices went 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 you lick -like to come forward? >> this is going to start at 6926? >> yes. thank you. now we'll begin the last case. appeal case number 6926. property address, 2121 laguna street. block number, 0627. lot number, 019. the property is a four story building in construction for a multifamily

residential building in r2 occupancy. [indiscernible] dbi issued two notice of violation in 2018 and 2019 respectively after receiving two anonymous complaints from the member of the public about there retaining wall, [indiscernible] buildg parking garage. the nov was closed as it was found to be a [indiscernible] this violation refer to code enforcement in an order of abatement issued june 2022 by the hearing officer. today, over 6 years from the first nov te back in february 2 however the required permit still has not been completed with dbi final inspection sign off. the property owner obtained a

permit approval in january, 2023 and attend to comply with the violation, however, this permit stil completed with dbi final inspection to date. staff recommendation, uphold the order of emt of cost. the nov issued back in 2018, failed to comply with the violation within the timeline. four years after the first nov date, the order of abatement issued june 2022. to date, over two years has elapsed from order of abatement date, however the violation still remain outstanding. that lu >> thank you. >> thraunk. thank y. the appellate come forward. >> yes, good morning. my name is robert caruso with the john benjamin company and we are a construction project management bu have been

hired by the property management company, pmc to look into this situation and to go through the history of wt happened, and bring everybody up to date on where the project is now. so, i got into the-looked into all the minutia going back to 2018 when the first nov was filed. that was in february 22, 2018, and they subsequentially there was a permit application with dbi submitted in february and the permit was issued january the 5 of 2023, and i have the permit number if you want that. the work was started to mitigate that situation with that retaining wall in

of-that's not ah, correct. it is july of completed september 2023. rainbow water proofing and restoration, that was the general contractor on the job.al engineer on the job was murphy burr and curry and then the-i dont know if you know-get into some of the details of this. when you do a project like that, it involves concrete and retaining walls you have to have special inspections ecial inspector who independent of the general contractor and the owner goes out and makes sure all the concrete work performed was performed to the right specifications. materials and engineering. so, the work was done, it was comp the inspections took place on that permit issued.

ame submitted their special-the reports to the special inspection group which is part of d bi. there are two pieces that and one of my should have happened is the general contractor followed up and made sure those special inspections were submitted to dbi, however, the ame maintains all the reports and special inspections were submitted. issues and i talked to inspector ing about this, there is two issues, one involved shot creek, a procs ■used instead of pouring the concrete it was shot-if you want to look like a gun shooting concrete, that negated the one report that the special inspection group

requires, and the other was, there is another issue regarding how the concrete was cored and the way it was done negates the requirement for a second issue or second requirement that the special inspection group has. really, to boil all this down, ame is the general contractor with dbi. we have to go back and sit down with inspector and get his approval for these two processes that were used by rainbow water proofing and i'm confident that those ll be accepted by that over the counter inspector. n be finally signed off. the only two issues hanging up that permit, but the work was done and i in a

quality fashion. we had some pretty reputable players in the general contractor and structural engineer and then ame that 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 talked to joseph ing this week and we are all on the same page of what has to happen to get these inspections that are on the check-list, the inspection group uses, to get those signed off. that's it. you have any questions of me? >> you can have a seat and they'll call you 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. 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 deteara requires repair, so that is why the nov is issued correctly. the order of abatement is issued correctly, back in june 28, 2022 and as of to date they still cannot get the permit final. is correct. even those correction are before the order abatement issued and there is

special inspection and the appellate informed me they tried to revise it, but i informed them they need to submit new permit application to have the dbi engineer approval before that can be revised, so, that's my rebuttal. thank you. >> does the appellate have rebuttal? okay. >> there is reference from-you can review from page 15 of my report that shows the status of the inspection and they [indiscernible] all current inspection was performed by third party and it is■: still outstanding, please review page 15. >> thank you. appellate? >> i have in my hand here a copy of the permit application d that shows it was submitted in 2020 and

finally issued in 2023, and then i also have a document here from ame that they submitted to dbi in which they addressed those two issues remaining to be signed off by dbi in to finalize the permit. . i'm under the impression, piecing all this together that a permit was issued and the work was done. the permit application went in in 2020 and my understanding it wasn't issue til 2023 because of the process-approval process that have to take place to get the permit issued. that is not really something that is strange to me, because i do a lot of work in san francisco and there is a time, so that permit was issued according to this document i have, this copy

of the dbi permit, ■dit was issued in 2023, and the work was started in july of 2023. and then i have applied materials engineering letter here that is dated, november of 16, 2023 in which they addressed these issues at are still open today. these two report issues that the special inspections office is looking for. what has have happened, which should have happened is, right when letter was submitted, a meeting should have been called with dbi, meet with the over the counter inspector and have those two points or those two checkpoints addressed and authorize the fact that they were not

necessary because of the process used do the construction. in my mine it is a paperwork thing, 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 issue. this is something thatcould be resolved, but it has to be meeting of the minds. meeting to go through and address these two processes that were used in the ow that those two items are not necessary. thank you. >> thank you. the board can deliberate.

>> before we ion, can you remind what exactly is being-what we are reviewing today? i feel i heard a few different things it is that the--yes. i'm asking our staff. >> they are appealing the issuance of the order of abateme >> generally? >> generally, yeah. >> and we han't completed the permit? >> the paperwork issue is structural observation letters when submitted by the engineer gener of record. let me back up. structural observation is required whether the engineer of record submit plants and e plan checker approves or not and going forward that is a requirement to close the permit. structural observation general

observeitation by the engineer saying it meets the plans. there are two required and haven't received the letters from engineer of record and still waiting for those. the appellate is saying-whether they use [indiscernible] we have special inspection from that, but there are two other items one just general concrete construction and the other is for the engineer wanted to view the location of the steel prior to drilling of the dowels for spifhave never gotte letter from the engineer and on top that, they never called for inspection by the district inspector to look at the work before it was coveup 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. you have, you have copies? >> i have just the one in my hand. >> we ■have those in our-- >> i don't know which document. >> whatever you are looking at in look at it, it may be helpful. maybe the overhead. >> you have it? >> that is the permit you are - >> this is actually--

>> this is the information on the permit and when it was issued, correct? we are curious whether or not you have ■vinspection documents >> which documents? >> the doents about the special inspection. >> i have this letter from-- they refer to the shot rebar. the way they attack that wall, they broke it down so they didn't touch any of the $■orebar, so they could the rebar before they put the shot crete on and why they are maintaining those two issues are not germane to this particular project.

i'm confident when they do have this meeting with the special inspection group that it is going to be accepted. have mmissioner williams, additional questions? okay. >> yes, i are think we do. thank you. i think--well,b it may be irrelevant whether or t thesethings are solved at this exact moment. i have been in this before, you submit a project and has requirents and changes and go back and talk about deand revise it. fine. ■g it sounds like everything was done, it sounds like the last piece needs to happen, that's fine. that is sort of irrespective of the notice of violation issue which is from 2018 i guess. this is what is throwing me a bit. somebody called and said unsafe

condition. can you fix this? they did. they got plans approved, whatever, fixed everything. it isn't totally signed off. the notice of violation is for what? there was a unsafe condition and it was given 30 days to be remediated? >> my understanding it was two think-not sure of this, but i think one of ■ them was one of the hoa member. >> maybe this is all irrelevant. >> anyway, they called in and said there is this problem wi >> that was the violation. now, i think there was-go ahead. >> maybe i can hear from the staff. in an issue, the city comes and looks at itand say yes, there is a issue. building owner you need to fix this. that is your what notice of

violation? what 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 make the if they don't then we move forward to sc they still not comply, so we [indiscernible] >> got it. okay. >> i also wantto--so called other special inspection requirement under my report, page 16, screening or scanning rebar, this is important to avoid damage in the existing rebar inside- >> sure, but that between the structural engineer and-i agree, tg is

on the form, somebody has to address it. if it didn't take place somebody needs to explain why and say why is okay.■a a complaint, notice violation issued, fix this, they filed for a permit, it took a while. this is right in covid, a whe to get the permit approved. it didn't get approved and the construction didn't occur in the timeline designated oen the noting of violation, so you have a 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 the hearing 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 and the hearing officer said is is enough and issued the order of abatement. >> to me, all these things can be true that it was repaired and

close to being closed out and closed out soon and there was notice of violation and order of issued in accordance with procedures and unsafe condition, right? >> correct. >> in which case, it is it not inappropriate to uphold the order of abatement in my opinion. it doesn't effect the work that is currently happening and now done and i'm glad that is fixed. it sounds like it spwas fixed appropriately, but there was still that lapse or--it sounds like at the time, the director or whom ever granted extensions and whevethe agreement was, it didn't get done in that teamline timeline and whether that was legitimate or not, ut 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 reason we wouldn't uphold the order of abatement. yes. if i may. >> commissioner. >> i have a question. is the order of abatement applied to the entire building or just the owner who lives in condo g. >> okay. >> commissioner sommer, would you like to make a-i heard a motion maybe from you. >> sure. i motion to uphold

the order of abatement. >> second. >> there is a motion by commissioner sommer to uphold the order of abatement. is there a second? >> commissioner alexander-tut. >> second by commissioner alexander-tut. okay. is there motion and second, we'll do roll call vote. president chavez, yes. vice president neumann, yes. commissioner alexander-tut, yes. commissioner meng, yes. commissioner shaddix, yes. commissioner sommer, yes. commissioner williams, yes. the motion passes unanimously. next is d, general public comment. sorry. >> i believe there is also assessment of cost issue. since it is not the last

motion, you should have another motion on [iis >> is there a motion to uphold the assessment of cost? >> also a motion to uphold the assessment of cost. >> second. >> there motion by commissioner sommer, seconded by commissioner alexander-tut to uphold assessment of costs. i'll do roll call vote on that motion. president chavez, yes. vice president neumann, yes. commissioner alexander-tut, yes. commsioner meng, yes. commissioner shaddix, yes. commissioner sommer, yes. commissioner williams, yes. the motion ■=carries unanimousl now, we will go d, general public comment. memberoffs the public may address the board on matters within the board's jurisdiction and not on today's agenda. any general public comment on e abatement appeal said board? seeing none in person, non

remotely. item e is aou is there a motion to adjourn? >> so miis there a second? >> second. >> we are now adjourned. it is-all commissioners are in favor of being adjourned. it is 1104 a.m. we will take a brief, 5, 10 minute recess and reconvene as the building inspection commission. [meeting adjourned]

>> i'm san francisco's first drag laureat in the world. the drag laureate program and the position is one this celebrates an artist for being the best in their craft and i'm proud to have received that xroel it it is afternoon ambassador role. a role that represents the lbgtq+ san francisco the focus on the drag performers and trans-activists and performers in san francisco as well. when i heard the city was creating the drag laureate role i was so excited because it did foal like they were paying attention to us. and cared about when we gave culturally and economically to the city new drag laureate for the city and county

of san francisco! i'm getting the call from the mayor i was chosen was fantastic day. i will always remember. i thought that it would just be about the bay area. becae of what happening in the world it became a national story. i hope it can shine a light on san francisco and how they take care of the drag community and the lbgtq+ community. i hope that i can help carve out this position and create a role with programs and events this can be passed down to future drag laureate this is come after me and can set a stage and standard for what this program is in san francisco and national low and inner nationally. there is a r san francisco. that the drag community has been

part of. i'm very proud to follow in their footsteps and able to maintain what the drag community forward with creating a bright future. my job is to elevate and celebrate [music] since the opening on third and mission in 1the grove is a epicenter. tis is part of the community. we bring tourist, we bring convention ears and have a huge group of locers who live here. we are their living room and love to see them on a regular basis and seek newcomers to the city of san francisco and serve

them a good dose of san francisco hospitality. we make everything in house from scratch every dape we vahand carved [indiscernible] the chicken pot pie we serve probably a hundred thousand if not more. roasted chicken, prime rib, salad[indiscernible] coffee cake and [indiscernible] all he pies are fresh baked. the home made cookies are done, once, twice a day, depending how fast they go. we believe in goold old fashion home cooked food. we want to be a welcoming, warm hospitable place for everyone to come and hang out. respond time with friends and family, meet new people. have important conversation. relax and enjoy, rejuvenate, get restored, enjoy one another and the at sphere the growth. the grove is 730 to 830, :a wee

and dinner. [■ >> good morning. today is wednesday july 17, 2024. this is the regular meeting of the building inspection commission. i would like to remind everyone to please mute yourself if you are not speaking, and the first item on the agenda is roll call. president alexander-tut, here. vice president shaddix, here. commissioner chavez, here.