mr. duffy? okay. nothing further. so -- >> actually, i've got a question for mr. sucre. so a lot of this discussion this evening has been in regards to the orientation of the corner property. now -- and i understand that -- that the zoning administration -- administrator has already made a letter of determination or an e-mail of his determination. the question would be is in the eyes of the planning, is that -- is it oriented on 22nd or is it oriented on -- and i asked this earlier, but what i'm referring to is legally. is it on carolina or is it on 22nd? >> it is on carolina. >> okay. >> we are stating that the frontage for the purposes of creating the rear yard is oriented towards carolina. >> and sorry to interrupt, but during all this process, was it determined that the garages and the facade change was consistent with permits and approval? >> we didn't research the alterations that have occurred to the building at 897 carolina? >> i mean, do we know when that happened roughly? i mean, 'cause looking at the -- at the front of the building, i mean, i can't imagine tha

mr. duffy? >> joe duffy, d.b.i. the permit under appeal was approved by d.b.i., plan checked, went through building department review. as you can see from the plans, it's only for work on the ground floor, and to provide that second means of egress. i actually was at this property maybe three years ago on this issue. i believe i met that gentleman, yeah, just as a -- they wanted me -- some advice on this issue, and i advised them that on the ground floor, you would have to provide a second means of egress. i wasn't brought up stairs to the second floor. i came to see that as a separate issue, even though it's -- it's connected a little bit, and in my opinion -- and i spoke to mr. boskovic at the building, if someone thinks there's an error of an exit in the building, contact d.b.i. we certainly don't want anyone with unsafe exiting. so that would be my opinion on that. this is ground floor work, and of course, there is a floor above it, but that could be treated as a separate issue. and unless -- and i didn't know t

>> mr. duffy, i am assuming i should ask this question to you, given that it's the building and not planning. so, mr. sanchez just pointed out that there was exposed elements that are not only unpermitted but probably illegal. that there are -- that you walk down a hall and i'm sorry you did not go on the site visit but i will trust the eyes of the zoning administrator. there is a door that shows from the hallway and if you were trying to get through that door in an emergency to save someone, you would find that you could not because it was sheet rocked over. these are illegal conditions. where does your department come in with something that would yellow tag, red tag or stop the occupancy of a building like this in this condition, especially with dementia patients. especially with seniors who probably lack the physical agility to move quickly during an emergency? >> we do have a notice of violation documents all those conditions. it's pretty well written notice of violation and it's in the -- i w

mr. duffy? >> good evening, commissioners. joe duffy, d.b.i. yeah just on a couple of the points that mr. sanchez brought up are concerns of mine, as well. just reviewing the plans this morning at the office, some of the labelling of the areas are something that i wouldn't be used to seeing. i know it's been approved by d.b.i., but i never got a chance today to speak to the plan checker. if you look at the grand floor plan on a-100, they're labelling these areas as common space on the ground floor behind the garage. i'm not used to seeing common space. you know, we normally have storage. there is one storage room on the existing plan, but they're showing this common space. i'm not sure what common space means on the ground floor of a building. i'd prefer to see that labelled as storage or whatever it's going to be used for. the occupant load factor, i don't even know if we have something in the code for that. common areas of buildings are generally lobbies, hallways, corridors, stuff like that, but this seems to be some sort of a room that's goi

both mr. duffy and mr. sanchez expressed suspicion at the last hearing, that this area behind the garage would facilitate its use as a ground floor dwelling units. the counters, g.f.i. units, appliances have been erase, but can you really erase the intent of what was there in the first place? i would point to a couple things that still remain. there's lighting and ventilation calculations here which are suggestive of living space. i would not do that unless you were considering it as habitable area. and lastly, why in the plans that you just received, does it show three units specified? did someone forget to erase that? thank you. >> i have a question. >> president fong: are they finished? >> oh, yeah, are you guys fin h finished? >>clerk: you have 16 seconds. >> so we continued this case from a couple weeks ago. you filed the peal. is there a reason you did not submit a brief or show up at the last hearing. >> we did submit a brief. we didn't show up because we felt the brief spoke for itself, and we felt

. >> mr. duffy? okay. well, thank you very much. >> let's go to the last item. >> we are on to item seven, the board of appeals annual report for fiscal year 18. the charter requires all boards and commissions to issue an annual report and also gives the public an opportunity to see what we've done. so i do have some corrections in the litigation section, so when we get to that, i will point those out. to pie light a few points -- to highlight a few points, 29 meetings, 105 hours. moving on to page six and i can just give you a brief summary. i don't know how you prefer. i can give you a brief summary and if you have questions or want to go back. >> highlights. >> okay. >> some highlights, so our appeal volume is slightly above the 10-year average of 178 appeals per year. we had 180 new appeals. and moving to page eight, no surprise, our subject matter, 76% of appeals heard were of land use decisions made by the department of building inspection, the planning department, and the zoning administrator. other

i'm sure mr. duffy will address that. >> thank you. >> thank you. >> commissioner lazarus do you have a question? if the building on the corner didn't exist, would the setback be adequate? would you see that this project would be approved? >> so if the building on the corner did not exist, you would basically take the rear yard based on the other building on the other side. it would align to the other building. >> so, you are not given the opportunity to do weeks of analysis on this. would you bird dog this a little bit and if that corner project wasn't there and you were looking on the back of a match book, would it get approved? >> likely, yes. if it's in the current condition. as i said, we did quite a long review process between 2014 and 2017, we worked on several iterations with the architect and if the proposal before us was to come forward in its current state, we would likely would approve it. >> on the issue of previous council, they spent a lot of time on the non compliance of the corner build

. >> i >> mr. duffy, you know your case has been rescheduled. okay. all right.he just missed us from being on vacation. that's what it was. >> exactly. >> welcome back to the october 17, 2018 meeting of the board of appeals. we're returning to item number 6, this is a special item from the residential decks policy. and mr. sanchez. >> a good evening, president fung, members of the planning department. this is the first of three items we will bring that relates to the draft roof decks policy which the planning commission considered in late august and specifically asked for the board's feedback on the draft policy. other items to bring to you would be an informational position on a.d.u.s, accessory dwelling units as well as historic preservation. there has been discussion of that earlier in the year and we will work with the executive director on scheduling, and i appreciate we were able to make good use of the hearing tonight and squeeze us on for this item. we have david winslow, principal architect who has been before you before to discuss design and have desig

mr. scott sanchez, representing the planning commission, and we expect to see joseph duffy, senior building inspector from the department of building

, inspector duffy from the complaint department, have all walked the building and they're all minus the three-unit building. anything else? >> thank you. >> ok. >> thank you. >> thank you. mr. sanchez, you have nothing? [laughter] >> to add at this moment. yeah. >> he is carrying that 20-pound. >> did you bring your barbell. >> thank you. scott chan says. the matter before you is an issue with building inspection records. we do rely on the three hour port on the c.f.c. to be the golden record of the legal unit count of the building. the planning department relies on those records and we believe that department of building inspection acted appropriately in this case. we did submit a brief to outline additional information that was left out of the appellant's -- it's hard to call it a brief. it's much more than a brief. they left out the history related to the authorization that they thought to merge from three to two units on the property and the planning commission heard that and denied it last year leading them to continue with this path to the board of appeals to seek change in the c.f.c. and the legal unit count of the building from three to two units. in our brief, we

duffy asked. >> this is the most exclusive club in the world. it includes mrs.d it is actually shocking to me. in the case of michelle obama, she actually has incredible political and cultural power at her fingertips to stop this. it would take one visit to ellen, one visit to jimmy fallon or kimmel's show, or a tweet, knock it off, lay off the president's family, especially our first lady. it would end. ainsley: she is not our president. they shouldn't go after her for wearing high heels or flats or wearing a jacket or portraying her that way. she didn't run for office. she is the first lady. steve: will take one tweet according to rachel campos duffy from one of the first ladies. brian: snoop dogg was shooting president. everybody was outraged. this is someone should not be in the line of fire. 13 before the hour. ainsley: there is trend to ditch the pledge of allegiance. we will never do that. a performance on fox square forming-- performing a special pledge song. >>> mike come pay yo meeting saudi king saloman. what they discussed about the disappearance abo