>> i think there is a misunderstanding between 2006, which was our first submittal. first resubmitted, -- we submitted. because the home association stopped it, we had to comply. pdç77çÑi the one that is, you know, legal. we cannot go away from that. yes, we have the same approved plan. zyvsrÑiçóof those te plans that you handed to the appellants last week -- are those the plans? ño% hky0lñr>> . which we did only after we got -- after we received a permit in ó no, wt to have a two-car garage. no, wt whenever the neighbors have, that should be what we have. -- whatever the neighbors of -- have. that is what i gave to the neighbor. plan that added space to the garage. but that is not what was approved, right? >> to get approval from another department. from the building department. there is another department where you give addendums, changes in your approved plans. commissioner hwang: that might have been for a curb cut. commissioner fung: a curb cut. if you want to speak, speak at the microphone. >> this is very clear. commissioner fung: it is not clear. your docume

the permit holder's submittal was in 2010, and they do show s. that is not the project. that is a much, much wider driveway with two garage door entrances,6lf!v77óçi where we h. they have a 20-foot curb cut, so that is not the project. i do not know if that is version two or three. commissioner fung: it does not matter. there are two questions. ûñthe volumetric -- was equivalt to what was provided to the homeowners? >> yes. commissioner fung: is the floor plan the same? >> yes. Ñiçy/ fung:and the space? >> yes. commissioner garcia: is the first floor have a boat -- have a boat --d] is the first floor habitable? >> the building department can discuss that because that is a technical issue about when you determine a story. 18 or 12? -- are we add 18 or 12? -- at 18 or 12? excavation? >> no, it is my understanding could submit an excavation permit. i would defer to the building department. addendum or not, appealable to the board of appeals. ]tçcommissioner fung: :jqe[tódoe sed elevations for the different floors? >> what was included in my pack it does not show -- include

land and issue an additional for the f -- the first allows the contractor to begin procurements, submittalsnd some field surveys. one challenge we are encountering on the bay division pipeline 5 project, we have encountered a high concentration of nickel in some of the soil we dug up for trenching activity, so that will be requiring special hazardous material handling and compliance with more stringent disposal requirements. also on that project, we have m site that will require us to tunnel under that site, which, ofrhvok course, is going to bee costly. we also have five other sites withó archaeological discoveries that could impact construction, so we are monitoring those very carefully. we are trying to work through some last minute changes, skit under control of facilities with our operations map. some late changes have impacted our construction activities, and i have asked our engineering staff to work closely with the water enterprise engineering staff to try to resolve this issue by the end of the quarter. we need to do a better job act identifying control needs earlier on -- better

panel is community involvement and outreach and from the inception of this program, it's through the submittal of an application that's available on our website, livablestreets.org. and residents complete an application and let us know of the worse locations and we need time and signatures and to verify support and we take the applications and review it and take data and work with the residents and get in line with the projects we have funding for. and one is local streets and one is arterials. and because there are certain measures you can do on arterials, or measures you want to use on resident streets that you don't for arterials. and i get the question, how come it takes so long to get the traffic measures solved in the city. and there is a rigorous community involvement and hearing process that's involved for everything that we put in. and it works both ways, it's good to involve people. so that when the measures go in and everyone knows that the measure was approved by a consensus of people rather than being surprised when the measure goes in. i will be happy to answer questions at the e

i urge you to re-evaluate this submittal. thank you very much. >> thank you, president miguel, directtors. it seems there is a time for a review of category d and how potential historic resources are checked in the o.t.c., over-the-counter permit process. three pieces of the application and architectural plans and a set of drawings are typical. the scope of work must match between the form 8 and the architectural description of the scope of work, but most importantly the structural drawings in the architecture drawings should match in terms of the scope of work. planners don't stamp the structural sheets of an over-the-counter permit application or any structural sheets on any applications for that matter. one must study the structural details to understand whether or not they're consistent with what's shown in the architectural plan because an application that state it is not making exterior changes could incorporate structural details that require them. just like when we were in third grade and someone wouldn't fess up to w