the planning commission and pea planning department we're going to be joined shortly loophole by joe duffy representing the denial and nick the senator plan checker with the street use and mapping i don't see him here but chris with the urban forest internal revenue with the public works mr. pacheco at this time go over the go over the procedures. >> please be advised the ringing of and use of cell phones and other electronic devices are prohibited. out in the hallway. permit holders and others have up to 7 minutes to present their case and 3 minutes for rebuttal. people affiliated with these parties must conclude their comments within 7 minutes, participants not affiliated have up to 3 minutes - no rebuttal. to assist the board in the accurate preparation of the minutes, members of the public are asked, not required to submit a speaker card or business card to the clerk. speaker cards and pens are available on the left side of the podium. the board welcomes your comments. there are customer satisfaction forms available. if you have a question about the schedule, speak to the staff after t

>> good evening, commissioners joe duffy dbi i don't have too much to add on this question our noticef violation gives people the option to legalize or remove that's what this one g did to legalize or revert back to the use i don't see my plans to show you how it could beleaguer listed maybe there's some part could be legal and the photographs show you some space in there but we do give people the option i choose to remove it maybe it can beleaguer listed i don't have enough information we only give out the codes and let people to design to meet the code the grandfathering maybe something we can use but dbi can't do that it has to meet code maybe a way to legalize if. >> can you i'm sorry are you finished refresh our memory on the nov it was for an unpermitted bathroom or because the clarence's were not appropriate and the notice of violation was for a final inspection for the rear deck that is still to be dealt with we give them the permit to remove the deck under a separate permit and. >> second bathroom was constructed without the benefits of a permit and permits failed to produce

provide the board with advise i'm cynthia goldstein the boards executive director and joined by joe duffy representing the department of building inspection mr. pacheco if you could go over the please be advised the ringing of and use of cell phones and other electronic devices are prohibited. appellant and representatives each have 7 minutes to present their cases and 3 minutes for comments and minutes, members of the public are asked, not required to submit a speaker card or business card to the clerk. speaker cards and pens are available on the left side of the podium. the board welcomes your comments. there are customer satisfaction forms available. if you have a question about the schedule, speak to the staff after the meeting or call the board office tomorrow we are located at 1650 mission street, suite 304. this meeting is broadcast live on sfgovtv cable channel directly from sfgovtv. thank you for you attention. we'll conduct our swearing in process. if you intend to testify and wish to have the board give your testimony evidentiary weight, please stand and say i may speak without

whether that is easier or not for this unit, i would defer to senior building inspector joe duffy i know we have a copy of the plans here. while it is not summating to 317 or the executive directive one item of note which i think is important and is new information i just was able to share this with the permit holder this evening and the appellant i think may not be aware of this, although i think they probably should be but on november 10th of last year, mr. merchant did file a bbm request which is a black book notification request, it was entered into our computer system on the 12th but we count the one year date that it's valid from the date they submitted it so it's valid from november 10th last year to november 10th of this year. the permit was reviewed by the planning department on november 12th which is the same day i think it was entered into the computer system, i would say staff probably may have not seen this, it could have been entered in the afternoon and staff reviewed the permit in the morning, i feel we must honor the bbn request, the appellant did not make any arguments

provide the board with advise i'm cynthia goldstein the boards executive director and joined by joe duffying the department of building inspe

. >> good evening commissioner joe duffy dbi just one thing on the brief i've read from the appellant she wasn't aware of the notice of violation and the sick amended notice was caused because of the first calling the notice of violations are available at dbi for mop to see you can you can look it up on line and there's a notice if you come down to the department of. >> sorry. >> i wanted to respond to that item i read in the brief we do make them available to anyone that wants them. >> any public comment on this item? seeing none, then commissioners. >> different. >> the excuse me. the rehearing requester has not provided any you knew information i'm not prepared to have a rehearing. >> any other comment questions. >> move to deny it on the basis no new information has been provided. >> mr. pacheco call the roll please. >> there's a motion on the floor tb commissioner fung to deny this rehearing request commissioner president lazarus commissioner honda commissioner wilson thank you vote is 4 to zero this is denied and a notice of decision a shall be released. >> moving on to hayes va

say joe duffy my name is on every issuances but the construction bid the actual and 5 decimals over the ambient you can work 5 decimals above ambient in section 29 maybe dpw rules are different that's not a lot of noise you're right about that >> requires a night noise permit but this is actually a workshop in the city with all departments police and fire and dpw and mta working on this it is a very, very lutz a public issue with a lot of we do almost of - a lot of good things with outreach i'll say we had the same problem with the back up larmdz that's all people complain about the white noise left arms are making a big difference not many more complaint to hopefully, the same specification i thought i'd give my opinion. >> are we waiting for a document? no? >> i'm going to suggest we move along. >> we'll hold this case out and move on to the next item item 9 sand hill versus the zoning administrator on hayes protesting to bryan a letter of the determination regarding whether commercial uses are allowed in the remain garages and parking in the backyard. >> you have 7 minutes. >> good e

. >> commissioners joe duffy dbi the permit under appeal was for the rear edition to committed two new interior stared and electrical permit work filed in march of 2014 and issued by deploying on december 23rd a side permit the cost was six-hundred $6,000 on the permit so for and it is a site permit we want to anticipate the amounted to be issued with the structural work i don't have too much more to add if you guys have questions i'll be happy to answer any questions and some stuff on the seismic work if preapplication notes or letters i don't bring that here i heard it was researched not sure that will help you with anything either. >> can i see a show of hands how many people plan to speak on public comment ms. michael's remove that from the side and if the people can line up on that side the room that will help move the speaking faster if you haven't filled out a speaker card that helps us in the preparation of our minutes you'll have two minutes to speak and commissioner president lazarus because of the hour and the length of the - >> okay. so please begin. >> hi, good evening. i'

>> commissioners, joe duffy, dbi again i don't have too much to add, i probably apologize for not having a more detailed cost of fee, i didn't think the fees were going to come into this tonight. i know there were fees paid for staff time and there was a correction notice issued at the time, i don't have the amount of that. i heard that 1.6 million dollar -- i'm not sure if that's the permit valuation fees on permit valuation or 1.6 million dollars in fees, i just simply don't have that information with me. i do have the valuation that was on issued permits which i typically bring with me to the hear ltion i don't usually take the fees for every single permit, that's something i don't have with me and i'm not sure how important that is, i wanted to state that and just in some of the comments i mean, everyone at dbi took this seriously we don't have this happen. this type of thing does not happen and we don't want it to happen again and for -- i know people are saying there's this going on and that going on i was there at the time and dbi and i saw the concern and the work that went into

>> commissioners, joe duffy dbi again the building permit under appeal is a permit for a revision to permit application 20111063 to document change to procedure and scope of construction due to damage to existing structure. that permit followed the incident that you heard about on december 2013 i believe it was december 18, the department issued a notice of violation, the shoring supporting the existing structure has failed causing downhill displacement of the existing building it is detached from the shoring, a substantial hazard exists, necessarily mitigation work is understood way. there was a permit issued for emergency stabilization of the structure, when mitigation work approved under the permit is complete under the direction of engineer of record, stop any work as far as demolition and preserve all elements of the structure and shoring on-site, so as you know, the permits issued to comply with the failure on the shoring, the department was involved in this, we got called out and we were out there a lot obviously and involved with the engineer of record. our engineering team a

>> commissioner, joe duffy dbi, the building permit under appeal was filed on november 12th, 2014 and through intake at dbi, i was routed to the planning department, approved by the current planning on the 12th of november the following went through building plan check on the 13th of november mechanical plan check and got issued on the 13th of november it's a form 8 over the current permit to remove illegal kitchen and bedroom on third bedroom, convert to rom pus room and storage. there are no active complaints on the property so it was not to comply with the notice of violation, i think you heard that earlier. but it looks like it was properly approved by dbi for what we do in these cases someone came in said they had an illegal kitchen, showed that on the plans and it was reflected as a single family dwelling on the permit, so the department approved the permit. i'm available for any questions. >> mr. duffy did you check the 3r on this? >> the only thing i did was i checked the city of cesar's property profile and that's showing a single family dwelling it says one storey, and 1215