on dbi programs and permits. when the committee considered the quarterly winners this year, they selected kevin's performance as the most outstanding. congratulations and thank you for an outstanding support from 2017. that, madam secretary, concludes my president's announcements. >> u.n.ing that -- thank you. would all the members come forward and the members that nominated them.would all the me forward and the members that nominated them. you have the certificates and everyone can come forward. >> thank you to james zahn for having me at dbi and thank you to my teammates who made it a wonderful experience for working at dbi and continues to do so. i would like to thank the electrical inspection division for welcoming me since my arrival in 2015. and that i can to the bic -- and thank you to the bic.nk you to . >> i am usually not a public speaker, but i would like to also thank my team members who have helped me work on the warriors project. steven and joseph, and also my former supervisor mark walz who initial

do you go to dbi commission and present these? not to demand more of your time, but that information would be helpful also for them to hear? >> i've been there, but i'm waiting for that joint hearing. here's for the minutes and the correct. and if you could hand them, the thing i gave them. >> president hillis: we got it. >> thank you for the suggestion. >> president hillis: yep. >> secretary: if there is nothing further, we can move onto the regular calendar. 9. proposed department budget and work program. this is an informational presentation. >> good afternoon, john ram, we are here to present our annual initial hearing on the budget. it's hard to believe we're there again, budget season is now lasting practically the entire year. but initial hearing and then we'll come back to you in a few weeks to ask for your recommendations to go for the department budget to go to the mayor's budget. i will ask deborah lan disto make the presentation and tell you that as with last year's budget we are at a steady state. the budget is not gr

>> commissioner moore: i think it would be a good thing to add to our discussion with dbi. most important metrics are lights, safety, and standard requirements by which livable homes are designed and these units have to follow the very same metrics, and in many cases, it's not achievable, but again, i do believe that in order to be very clear about, that discussion could be an ongoing discussion with dbi, but when this particular piece in the back yard is identified as a former shed, i think there are already many, many things that come immediately to mind because in the definition of shed, it is not a small home, it is a shed. i can only take that word game here, but i think it requires a -- definitely a better understanding of what codes apply and in what form do they need to be applied equally to all, including these questionable units? >> president hillis: commissioner richards? is. >> vice president richards: interestingly enough, when i saw this, i didn't really read the packet, because it was a no right off the bat, but if you look at tab g under mr. gladstone's brie

he was only paying some fines to dbi. those fines for dbi, he is still accruing fines of $48 permonth for a monthly fee because the -- >> that's better than 250 a day. >> exactly, but we still have outstanding issues here with the property. he hasn't taken care of all the permits. we still have suspended permits, as you heard from mr. is not che sanchez. there's still issues to resolve. >> ok >> okay. mr. duffy, can you give me a timeline when the error was discovered and when there was a correction in issuing these permits. what i'm trying to figure out in my brain is the intent here. we're all human, and we do make mistakes, but it seems according to the brief that he submitted, that he was trying to be compliant. >> i think he was trying to be compliant after he got stopped or after it got discovered that this permit shouldn't have been issued the way it was, and planning may have not been involved in some of the permits. i don't have much with me. >> president honda: just when was the permit issued and when did the db

dbi requested a copy of survey when it is completed. i am pleased to have from our dbi employee of quarter three and four. and they are mr. cary mcillroy for quarter three. and election plan review and engineer for quarter four. nominated by the senior engineer and the outstanding work on the warrior stating project and with the initiative liability and complete deduction for the project's demanding timeline. and nominated by james zahn and dbi supervisor mechanical planning engineer who noted they had been twice as productive as other engineers in turning around electrical plan reviews required on major construction projects in quarter four and is exdi

i'm gina polling and lisa gibson and christopher may, pauley kirby, and bill strahan from dbi. i'm going to address the ceqa issue. i will speak mainly about ceqa piecemeali piecemealing. the appellant claims that it was piecemealed. it is prohibited under state ceqa statute. it covers the whole of the action, excavation and three-story rear addition. it's not unusual for one project under ceqa to be subject to multiple building permits and it's covering on work on the site that was permitted. the issuance of the building permit is not relevant to this appeal and, therefore, the project was not piecemealed. the second contention is that it may result insignificant impact on the coxhead house up hill and to the west at 2421 green street. the planning department reviewed the subject property and determined it's not individually eligible for listing on a register. it is also not within the district, thus, there is no historic resources are conducted or necessary. the appellant claims that the rear expansion would impair historic resources blocking windows andrews and access to lig

we're grateful that neighbors have observed and reported illegal activity and dbi and planning have responded to our complaints before even more of the house was demolished. as tragically has been known to happen. again, i urge the board to do whatever is in their power to protect mr. kauffman's home and protect my clients'. >> president breed: thank you. next speaker, please? >> i'm barbara hefernon. >> president breed: please speak directly at the microphone. >> i have lived in the neighborhood for 30 years. i will read an excerpt from a letter. i will read a section of the letter that they did send to the planning board. "when we as a neighborhood group gathered to meet the architect and developer, we spoke in one voice and raised our specific request. stay within the footprint of the original home. we went on to tell our own stories about how we did improvements to our own homes. as a group of neighbors, we communicate with each other and support each other. we've made a lot of improvements, but we've always stayed in contact with our neighbors in order to let them know what is going on a

i made a complained to dbi and their permits were revoked. i will finish up. in conclusion, i ask that the commission take the planning commission's recommendation and require that the project sponsors maximize the density new for two units. this can be achieved in three ways. first, project sponsors can divide the proposal now before you into two units. you have the drawings in front of you how it could be done. secondly, they could also provide a bona fide plan showing how an additional unit could easily and fees -- feasably be added to the proposal. and then they could come back with a greater two-unit plan expanded to the area and the rear of the lot. they have plans to build up top. >> thank you. next speaker, please. >> i'm joel halliwell, adjacent property owner to the east of 214 states. my partner and i have been residents since 1986. we've suffered under numerous threats, deceit and false promises from these developers who have no intention of living in this house and have told us that numerous times. our foundation has been damaged. walls bulldozed

dbi requested a copy of survey when it is completed. i am pleased to have from our dbi employee of quarter three and four. and they are mr. cary mcillroy for quarter three. and election plan review and engineer for

>> joe duffy, dbi. just a few things to add. mr. santos is correct in that if this work is done under this permit, it will clear the violation from the four properties. if there is any -- i have under the impression there were permits required for the other properties but that doesn't appear that's the case. if there was some temporary cribbing to be done, that would possibly be under a different property. that could be sorted out at a side meeting prior to the construction. if the permit is upheld, i would offer that dbi go out there before the resumption of any work so that we can get everyone at a comfort level that this work will be done in a safe manner to adjacent properties. i have been saying that from the word go to the appellant. obviously, he's concerned for his own property and the safety. we get that. we always get that at dbi. we try to relay that at all times. we're able to go out there, means and methods, proposal from mr. santos on how this work will get done so this doesn't impact the neighbor. mr. bleskovich is ob

to the extent that there is transparency between dbi and ostr, it would be important that ostr trackshat data. >> certainly. one other item i wanted to touch upon -- this comes up as a question a lot. how do people rent out their units? so, people have the option of renting out what we call hosted rentals where they're presented in unit. they can do that 365 days a year. they have the host present and it's sort of considered to be a low impact type of rental situation because it's going to be rented on an individual bedroom to a single person or couple or things like that. and then folks also have the option of doing up to 90 unhosted nights per year. so, we get required quarterly reporting. each quarter from the host. they report data to us that gives more visibility how they operate. the most recent quarter we have complete data would be third quarter of 2017. 16% of hosts reported having no stays within that quarter, which is not unusual. there are folks that do this kind of seasonally. of those hosts with stays, 58% indicated they were conducting hosted rentals only for an average

a few cases that have come to me that i have referred to your unit then you have to coordinate with dbi on, how are those going? >> you are right. sro's fall within a gray air what. they are not addressed by the short-term rental legislation. so, we have been tackling those issues as they come up and tackling them pretty aggressively as well as some of the other -- cross pollinated enforcement issues. we have a good working relationship with dbi on those and that's something we will also continue to monitor diligently. the nice part about being able to monitor and do enforcement at the platform level is it does free up enforcement staff time to go after those kind of cases, those more nuanced, complex cases where you want to get folks from department of building inspection, other agencies involved and really tackle a problem comprehensively. >> supervisor peskin: as to the abuse of corporate rentals, how's that working? >> abuse of corporal rentals in terms of -- >> supervisor peskin: 30 days or more but being listed as short-term rentals? i assume they all come off immediately because

>> joe duffy, dbi. it was a form 3 permit that was taken in for review. it looks to be meeting the intention of the building code. i see that they do have a total of five bedrooms and five bathrooms when it's all done. i would also warn, just warn them that if they start using it for some other use rather than it's intended, used as a single family dwelling, that dbi could be involved in the enforcement of that as well through our housing inspection services. lot of neighbors do get worried about these type of projects, and rightly so sometimes, but we can't look into the future. we do know it is legally a single family dwelling. from the plans, it does look like it meets building code requirements, from what i see. >> president honda: inspector duffy, was there any permit history of illegal work being done on the garage level? >> i couldn't find any. there's no complains on it either. >> president honda: thank you. >> is there any public comment? seeing none we'll have rebuttal starting with the appellant. >> i'm the appellant's son. i wanted to start by

it wasn't until a complaint was filed, that dbi found the permit approved building a new foundation, but required a 311 notice that had not been sent out. to me, it's a sign, not a ceqa issue, but a project sponsor not operating in good faith. they're communicating with the planner, but moving part of the project forward without proper approval. then planning approved with some reservations. my office has been trying to get an answer as to why that happened. we haven't gotten a real answer. october 10, a 311 notice is sent out and three drs were filed. some of them spoke in support of the appeal here, but it's usually done well in advance any ceqa that comes before us. it allowed the excavation work to begin before it was complete. ceqa appeal had to be filed, which was filed on november 22. you would think when a ceqa appeal is filed, anything permitted would stop, but it wasn't the case here. work continued on this site. and to me, it's a pattern of bad behavior here. it wasn't until december 21. y'all recall what was going on over the holidays and certainly mr. the holidays after

dbi investigated and concluded that while a dwelling unit existed at the property many decades prior, the unit had been removed in the 1980's pursuant to a building permit. we ended up in a dispute headed to the board of appeals rather than a planning commission hearing. in an attempt to reach a resolution with the dr requester, and knowing the city's pressing need for rent controls residential units, hudsef came up with the idea of replacing it with an adu in the existing unit at the rear of the property. it comes to you as a single-family home, replacing office use at 799 castro, and a rent controlled adu added to the building. as for the single-family home, we suggest that it is reasonably sized at 3150 square feet. there are at least 13 homes that side within two blocks of the property. concerns have been raised about the over yaul lot coverage, but this kind of lot komplg as proposed, with a 10 foot gap between the two buildings is the norm for corner lots in this neighborhood. we're increasing the distance between the buildings from 8.5 feet to 10 feet. finally, over 25 neighbor

my colleagues from dbi can speak to the absence of real lighting on a roof deck.there's no real clear guidance to set it to. but if you feel there are certain requirements pertaining to the height of potential light fixtures or some other metric on limiting the light, that's within your purview. similar ly, prohibiting fire pits or any other barbecues or facilities like that, that would be within your purview, as well. i mean, obviously, things -- whether it comes to furniture, that gets a little more challenging. a lot of outdoor furniture has a lot of storage components to it. it may not be different for storage cabinets themselves, but depend, we don't normally require permits for outdoor furniture. and i'm sorry, after the lighting, you were speaking about the cooking facilities. okay. we addressed that. >> pretty much. so we could actually limit it to no light. >> i don't think so. >> i don't think so. >> you have a stair there. you're going to have to provide light. >> yeah, i would prefer. >> do you have x-ray vision there? >> i can say there's no requireme

>> dbi and fire prevention work in conjunction working together with building and fire code as to what they can build in new construction. if you have specific questions about the code, my expert is right here. i could bring him up. but when it comes to roof decks, solar panels, most new construction does have sprinklers. >> correct. >> so that's good. but again, if a big earthquake hits and the water supply is compromised, the sprinklers are not going to work so there will be concern with wood still. are there specific questions about roof decks? >> no, i was saying it had come up before. i was trying to link my comment with your comment regarding mayor lee calling the chief of the department, he used to do that and did it with mission bay. i'm looking at the television and i see this, what's happening. >> the chief says what other building is on fire. i go i don't know. if our fire marshal has anything to add at this point. >> good morning chief and commissioners. our codes address all different hazards associated with use. our codes are based on the occupancy. how are we using the b

. >> we approved over the counter and dbi issued the permit. that was done in error. >> what is the department's kind of protocol when a permit is issued in error when it was rescind that permit? >> that is what happened. when we discovered the error, we still go through the process of suspending it. >> and what if it was built two years ago? when do you -- >> if it was already built, it would be a different situation. it would have been -- the notice would have expired by then. >> right. >> but in this case, we issued a new notice per the zoning administrator's direction, and then that made the -- that prompted the -- >> but it was built, he would haven't done it. >> well, if we discovered the error, after the fact is not typically when we do it. under construction is when we typically suspend the permit. >> right. that is my challenge. >> president hillis: i am sympathetic that clearly it is not an insignificant deck that you have spent money on and the department has issued a permit and now rescinded it. again, if this was clean and seeing t