unauthorized demolition, dbi and planning work together to resolve complaints of unpermitted work. penalties are one part of this process. unauthorized work and work beyond the permitted scope, the current process is dbi performs a site inspection, confirms work beyond the scope of the permit or work without permit, knows the violation issued, stop work. the site is secured and weatherized. by weatherized, i mean whatever components of the wood frame building remain, they're required to be weatherized for their preservation or potential preservation. design team then usually visits dbi for direction. permit holder is advised to contact the planning department for next steps. that's typically new permit application with plans, and they're back into their review wheel house. in regard to penalties and fees, the dbi portion of this is the stop work order is issued on the project and it's routed to planning for next steps. the specific penalties, penalties for exceeding the scope of the work are based on table 110(a) and table 1(a) k of the san francisco building code, and the penalty

implementation of penalties and fines that are in effect a deterrent to unpermitted demolition. and three, a demolition definition that is clearly and easily enforceable. revision of the existing code definitions of demolition will not address the problem unless the code is supported with adequate code enforcement. a discussion of code enforcement is not on today's agenda, and it should be. lack of code enforcement on recent projects where this is irrefutable evidence where a home has been demolished should be reviewed by both commissions. i encourage the planning commission to schedule a meeting in future commission meetings. lack of code enforcement is also a problem with heritage homes in san francisco. the home at 49 hopkins avenue, in the overhead, was demolished. it was designed by acclaimed modern architect richard newtra. a calculation is not required to determine the home was demolished. a complaint was filed, a notice of violation was not issued. the planning department and dbi failed to protect the architectural portion of san francisco. unpermitted demolitions and we

the planning department's lack of enforcement is one of the root causes of unpermitted demolition in san francisco. can you imagine what parking in san francisco would look like if the parking control officers did not believe in enforcement, but -- and did not issue tickets with fines, but worked with individual violators? thank you. >> thank you. any more public comment? seeing none -- just on -- you know, i think we're really -- both departments are understanding the importance of getting to the understanding that we need to do a better job in implementing our policy and procedures, particularly 317 has been a challenge for us and at the department here. it's been a challenge for us and also for planning. i do want to point out in a statement that, you know, there are a lot of projects out there that might have been presented as being illegal demolitions and they are not. and they have not exceeded the permits. and what i'm finding is that when the drawings are produced and the facts are put on the table that what is perceptually seen by some community members as exceeding the perm