Please carry on conversations in the hallway. The rules of presentation as follows. Appellants permit holders and respondents are given seven minutes to present their case and three minutes for he re but thal. Rebuttal. Members not affiliated with the parties have three minutes to address the board and no rebuttal. They are given three minutes and no rebuttal. To assist the board you are asked but not required to submit a speaker card or Business Card to board staff when you come up to speak. Speaker cards are available on the left side of the podium. Please note that the board reserves the right to not call an item after 10 p. M. Given the size of the calendar Public Comment will be limited to two minutes. If you have questions about requesting a rehearing, the board rules are hearing schedules. Please speak to staff or visit the board office at 1650 Mission Street room 304. This meeting is broadcast life on sf gov tv and will be rebroadcast on channel 26. The video is available on our website and can be downloaded from sfgovtv. Org. We will swear in those who intend to testify. Any member of the public may speak without taking an oath pursuant to the rights under the sunshine ordinance. If you intend to testify and wish to have the board give your testimony evidentiary weight stand up and say i do. Do you swear the testimony you are about to give will be the whole truth and nothing but the truth . I do thank you. Please be seated. Item number one is general Public Comment. This is an opportunity for anyone who would like to speak within the boards jurisdiction but that is not on tonights calendar. Is there anyone here for general Public Comment . Please approach the microphone. As i mentioned before Public Comment is limited to two minutes. Good evening. Welcome back. Hello, board and president swig. I just have a question here as a point of order. On item 7a 7b and 7c, it says they shall be heard together. I understand each of these appellants have paid 300 and it seems to me they should each have a turn to speak before the board. So as a point of order i would like to propose that and would like your response. Thank you. Thank you. I would like the executive director to respond to that question, please. Because i think theres a lack of clarity with regard to when things are held, when items are combined, that doesnt preempt anyone from right. Because all the appeals concern the same permit so Public Comment is limited. We dont have three separate sets of Public Comment. Right. But the individuals who filed the appeals will have the same amount of time to speak. That is correct. And they wont be three appellants correct . Thats right everybody will be their time. Correct. Okay. Next speaker, please. Hi, my name is paul. Im here to talk to you about the case. 181129. That was decided on august 9 of 2019. And that was the case that had some Indian Tribes and significant interveners. The interveners lived in montgomery county, maryland and also tracked to the National Resources defense council. This was about an fcc order that was trying to skirt National Environmental policy review, nepa act and they were caught. The judges didnt buy the argument. They didnt say these things were small or an 800,000 unit rollout was not impactful to the environment. And so they found it arbitrary and vacated that portion of the order to make it unlawful. Well they license their frequencies from the federal government. That makes every single small cell in San Francisco part of that federal undertaking. And we heard from the Dc Circuit Court of appeals that at this point only application needs to have a completed Environmental Assessment or Environmental Impact statement in order to go forward. Ive been listening to the tapes of this board for many, many weeks. Youve been seeking some way to say how do we stop this. This is exactly how you do it. You follow the Dc Circuit Court of appeals and you say excuse me, until we have substantial written evidence in the Public Record that such a review has happened by the Wireless Industry and fcc then the application is deemed incomplete. It takes a simple letter from your Department Public works to every applicant and their agent. You can do that tonight. You could actually inform the applicants and the agents here tonight. Theres no thank you. Now everything must stop. Thank you. Is there any other general Public Comment . Good evening and welcome. Hello. My name is sheryl hogan. Could you speak into the microphone. My name is sheryl hogan. And ive come before you and im coming to speak again about the microwave cell tower issue. I would like to tell you some information that i have and you have my documentation. The attorney for verizon called and stated the microwave cell towers are allowed on fire stations in San Francisco. I called the Firefighters Union and was told that is not true. They said verizon would indemnify the city from possible harm from cell towers if there were lawsuits against the city by its citizens. You have documentation in my exhibits to the contrary. In fact, the fcc mandated the Communications Companies alert their stockholders of potential risk because Insurance Companies will not insure them. Paul introduces annual supposed expert as a member of aide in a former meeting here. There is no aiee. In 1963, aiee combined with the institute of radio engineers and established ieee. I called new york ieee. Daniel roe is not a member of ieee according to the institute of electrical and electronic engineers. Ieee representatives gladly spoke to me as my father was executive Vice President of ieee and the recipient of the fredericks phillips gold medal for his research in microwave technology. Im going to read a quote from Richard Fineman who god the nobel prize. It is our responsibility today not to give the answer to drive everybody down in that direction and say this is the solution to it all because the limits of our present imagination. Your time is up. Thank you. Would you like a copy of Richard Finemans quote . No, thank you is there any other general Public Comment . Okay. Seeing none we will move onto item number 2. Commissioner comments and questions. Commissioners. Executive director, could you please remind the department of health that they made a commitment to us several months ago about an update on the 2010 commentary on the dangers of or not of cell phone and Wireless Communications and made the commitment to have that reward to us some time i believe in early december. And would you please let them know that we are anxiously and probably other members of the public im going to make that big leap of faith, that we are all anxious to receive their report as they promised. Thank you. Any other commissioner comments, questions . Is there any Public Comment on that item . Seeing none, we will move onto item 3 adoption of the minutes. [off mic] okay. Please approach. I did speak to dr. Thomason october 22 and again yesterday by phone. And i have later, i would like to share with you and gave you an email today, its in your packets. , of the people we asked to get in touch with. Hes reached out to two. Theres eight more. We are asking him to do the Due Diligence required before he revises this letter so he may have to take another week in december to get it done. We have carefully gone through the december 10 memo and given him contravening evidence to dispel that memo so he has the due to to duty to look at the science and put his professional judgment, not political issues but professional judgment on his medical determination. We expect that to happen in early december. Thank you. Thank you. Is there any other Public Comment . Okay. Moving onto item number 3 commissioners before you for discussion possible adoption are the minutes of november 13, 2019 meeting. Do we have a motion or comment . Move that we adopt the minutes as submitted okay. Is there any Public Comment on that motion . We have a motion from commissioner tanner to adopt the minutes from the november 13 meeting. On that motion. [roll call] that motion carries 50. We are now moving onto item number 4. This is a jurisdiction request property at 162 carl street k group llc requester is requesting the board to take jurisdiction oversight permit 1031520 which was issued on august 3, 2017. The appeal period ended august 18, 2017 and the jurisdiction request was filed at the board office on october 31, 2019. The permit holders were megan and bruce warren. Their permit description is to demolish existing rear extension on first and second floors rebuild existing internal stair remodel first floor bath closets and bedroom, addition on three floors. We will hear from the requesters first. You have three minutes. Thank you. I want to say thanks to the commission for giving us the opportunity to speak. My name is bill kearney. If you wouldnt mind. Thank you. Sure. My name is phil kearney my sister is susan kearney. The two of us are the k group. We are asking for the commission to grant our jurisdiction request to reopen the permit window. We are city natives. We have never complained to this board or any board before. This is our very first time showing into a forum like this. The permit we are contesting was apparently issued in august of 2017. It directly impacts our building. And well talk about that in a moment. Its going to require us to spend at least thousands if not tens of thousands of dollars. And we literally even though this was the permit was granted in august 2017 we literally learned of this in a sushi shop two months ago in 2019. And my sister will talk more about the notice in just a moment. We bought this threeunit building in 2000, almost two decades ago. Weve never lived there not for a night not for a day. And the notice went there instead of to us to our tenants who never notified us. We dont contest that bruce and megan who weve known for many years have a right to expand their home at all. But if they proceed without accommodation to us, we will either end up with windows to nowhere that are literally closed off boarded over vents removed and allowing stoves not to vent or we are going to have to remove the existing windows, remove the framing, remove the siding, reframe reside, sheetrock the interior, reimagine the interior cabinets add new deckwork, and well be losing light the ventilation. Its significant. We believe we have a right to some consideration by the Planning Department. Thank you. Thank you. Susan kearney. Partner in the k group. Im going to speak to the notification process. If you could adjust the microphone. Hear me . Yep ill speak to the notification process of the city which we believe was flawed since we didnt receive timely notification we couldnt appeal during the appeal window. So i would like to direct your attention to documents that we submitted showing that dbi and planning who were involved were both showing the wrong address for owners. It was showing the building our property address. And also in the board response, i would like to show the Mailing Address on three exhibits was our personal address and not the apartment address. Thank you. I have a question maam. So after reviewing the brief, action for jurisdiction request is lack of notification. What is your property tax mailed to . According to actually i was looking that up. According to exhibit lets see 2 exhibits 1 and i think that would be the current one, exhibits 1 and 2 these are grant deeds. A simple question. Where is your property tax mailed to . I mean our home. Not mailed to carl street . No, its not okay. And youre positive of that. Absolutely. Okay. Thank you. Thank you. I have a question. Just going back to this issue of addresses when did you update your Mailing Address with the Assessors Office . Did you make action since you purchased the property, looks like 2008 maybe there was a couple, exhibits 1 and 2 reference with the address and a carl street address. When was the address updated to your current address . It was correct at the time. It wasnt updated. You updated it to your correct Mailing Address. I dont believe we have. I dont think we have. So how would the notice be received to you at the different address. I see a carl street address on the two deeds. If you look closer it says when document 2 it says both of them 166 carl street so its not clear to me that theres one address on file. I dont know who wrote that below but i think in the first one it looks to me that its our rental address. And the second one may be the same thing. I dont know. The address where the taxes are received . Yep thank you. Thank you. Okay. Thank you. Okay. Thank you. Well now hear from the permit holders. Good evening and welcome. Thank you. I do that all the time. They come off pretty easy. My name is megan borne. And this is bruce borne. Go ahead. We had good relations with the tenants of 166 carl street and one of the owners for 17 years. We began planning our renovation in 2015 and secured our site permit in 2017. From the outset we have informed mr. Kearney of our plans and met all the planning and permitting requirements. The appeal period ended in august 2017 and only now does k group llc seek a new opportunity to appeal. Shows that k group transferred ownership to the partners as individuals in 2008. So k group does not own 166 carl, it was not required to be notified. Further, the requester says the 166 carl street address used to notify phil is correct but the records show his address is 166 carl street since july 2009 so planning cannot be faulted for using the assessors role to send notice to an address which has not been updated for ten years. Mr. Kearney uses 166 carl street address for business related to the property. In 2011 he secured a permit for remodel using that as the Contact Address in his contractors in 2019 also used 166 carl as his Mailing Address. The partners imply they were surprised about our project and they state two to three years ago we proposed a light well but they chose not to object at that time. Not only have we followed the required steps we have apprised mr. Kearney of our plans. We verbally informed him of the project in 2016. We invited him to inspect the soil test hole did you go adjacent to the foundation in 2016. And when we saw him at the restaurant two months ago mr. Kearney said oh yeah, i was supposed to come look at those windows, wasnt i . The requesters object our renovation will block two windows of their units which we offered to contribute to the reasonable cost of covering and painting them. Theyre 6inch by 30inch windows. The planner considered neighboring windows in his review. Our elevation showed the 166 carl Property Line windows uncovered and then covered. Planning required no changes to the facade but they required a matching and existing light well on 156 150a. Also the two stove vents and theres also a pipe, are code compliance issues. They are not our responsibility to remedy. So asking us to pay 30,000 for work that mostly consisted of improvements or code compliance. They said we would ask you pay the full amount. We are willing to drop any jurisdictional requests. Thank you. Your time is up. I have a question. Yeah. So as you just stated in your brief, it said from the offset, we informed mr. Kearney of our planned renovations and met the requirements of the planning and permitting process. So this was not a surprise to them at this point . No and then did you ever Exchange Emails or did he ever ask for plans to be submitted or supplied to him . Over the course of the couple of years mr. Kearney actually both mr. And ms. Kearney live in our neighborhood, about a block away. So we crossed paths a couple times in the neighborhood. I looked back and couldnt find any emails or texts from the intervening period between 2017 and when he and i met in september. However also in our brief, in october of 2016, the engineer needed to dig soil test holes. So we let mr. Kearney know that we needed to dig a hole next to his foundation, and we offered to have him come over at that point which was october of 2016, before any plans had even been formally submitted. Okay. Thank you. Did you you said that the requesters live a block away . Used to yes. And did they live there when you posted the 311 poster . Yes thank you. Thank you. We will now hear from the Planning Department. Thank you. Scott sanchez. This property at 162 carl street is located within rh3 zoning district. The permit was submitted in november of 2016 under section 311 neighbors within 150 feet of the property as well as a poster, bright orange poster that goes in the front of the property for the 30day notification period between april 5 and may 5 of 2017. No requests were filed during that time. It was approved and issued by the department of building inspection in 2017. The requester stated that the notification was flawed under section 311 we are required to use the owner address that the Assessors Office lists and this is the address the Assessors Office listed. I dont understand why they may be getting their property tax mailed to a different address but the Assessors Office very clearly dont have 166 which is their residence as the failing list for this. So we did comply with the requirements. As well the notice was mailed to the subjects and the poster was placed on the property. So i dont see any error with the notification process. If the Assessors Office had incorrect information, they should work with them to update that information. But we are obligated to take the information the Assessors Office has on file. Mr. Sanchez, your property tax is the city Assessors Office so they are mailing it to the address that they have. Yes. So if theres no other address on there your property tax is being sent to 166 carl street. I dont understand how it could be sent to a different address. Correct. Unless there is a something with the mailbox company or post office. They could bring in a copy of their property tax bill and show it to you tonight with the correct Mailing Address. These are Property Line windows that are not corrected protected correct . Correct. It meets the residential Design Guidelines, and staff considered the location of the windows. They are secondary windows. Can i ask one followup question . Mine is just a minor point. But how do we know that the Assessors Office lists 166 as the address . Is there something in the records . Is that just your testimony . So ive looked on our our records and thats what it shows. I confirmed whats on the mailing list is what the Assessors Office lists. Thank you. My question is if we were hearing this case tonight about the appeal permit as opposed to jurisdiction request and the subject came, and there was a conflict with regard to or the Property Line windows, they are not protected. But what about a pipe . What about an exhaust . What would be the position of the Planning Department on a Property Line accessory . The first question is whether or not what exists there is legal. And the department of building inspection may want to speak to that aspect of the venting. But again under Design GuidelinesProperty Line windows and venting apparatus would not be required to be protected. It generally its my understanding in the Building Code you have to meet your requirements on your own property and not seek your satisfying your requirements for venting or what have you on adjacent properties. So just for clarification. We would not protect it. So in real terms, if this was happening and again, we were in the midst of an appeal of that and the appellant was denied because of this Property Line situation the appellant would have no recourse to an accessory like a venting apparatus or a pipe, for example . If this was an appeal on the permit on the merits of the permit our position would be that it complies with the residential Design Guidelines and the project sponsor doesnt need to make any changes to the plan right. Thanks. Thank you. We will now hear from the department of building inspection. Good evening commissioners. Joe duffy dbi. Maybe i should get to the assessors records first. Because i was going to interrupt mr. Sanchez. I actually printed the printout from the Assessors Office and if i could have the overhead ill show you that. So whenever we go to the permit tracking system, we need to find out where our dbi does the mailing to and we pick this from the assessors records. You can see that theres two owners here susan kearney, east third avenue san mateo and theres a phillip, 166 San Francisco. So dbi would use that address for the notification which was a notification which we did in fact send to 166 street so thats pretty typical of what we do. The permit itself, i didnt see any issues with the building end of it anyway. I went through the proper processes and from reading the brief, just on the Property Line windows, theyre obviously nonconforming Property Line windows existing. And they are opening onto a general outline. So theyre probably from back many years ago. I dont know how long. But when someone builds next to you and you have a Property Line window if there were new windows today you would lose them. Its called ab009. Ive spoke about it many, many times to you. And you know but in the case of the existing windows, its very unfortunate. They are going to lose those windows. And thats because theyre not codecompliant. They might have been put in but over the years, things change. It might have been a vacant lot. We didnt know what happened way back whenever the building was built. And the vents opening on to the other property, that is definitely a problem. That shouldnt be the case. And if you werent building this addition, they probably could would continue to be like this, and thats fine you see it all over the city. Unfortunately this Building Permit has been issued. Theres going to be a wall next to that. That vent needs to get rerouted. Its probably going to need to go through the inside and come out on the roof and so that is something that needs to get done. Its always and ive spoken to the permit holder about this. They need to work this out together. Theres a window sill for example on one of the windows thats probably over Property Line. The new wall is getting in the way of that so that still has to be cut back. But people need to Work Together and its a pity they brought it to this forum to be honest with you. Obviously you have the right to do that. But these are things that are worked out every day in the week in San Francisco because of our zero lot line issues. It should have been discussed way back at 311 notifications. There are other forums even within the 15day appeal period. Its too bad they had to be bringing this up. There was some correspondence between them. And theres obviously a difference some contractor said it was going to be 30,000 to do the work. Obviously we dont get into that. One thing i would suggest to the owner of the property is if theres any walls that need maintained they should try and get that done because once theres a wall built, thats the end of it. Sorry im going over my time. I have a question. Actually two. When was the structural plan sent out . The dbi . The drawings were sent out . For the 311 notification . Yeah. And you sent it to the correct residence at san mateo . The Building Department . Yeah they did 166 third street. Its in the brief. Okay. You just showed something that had their address as san mateo. Theres two addresses. Theres one in san mateo and one on third street. Did you send it to those addresses . It was definitely sent to 166 third street. The letter is in the brief. The other question is if there was a complaint regarding the exhaust onto another adjoining property, would that have to be removed . That actually has happened unfortunately in front of this board . Yeah. The permit holder did file a complaint with dbi because i dont think they were getting anywhere so they filed a complaint to have the vents removed. Have to be corrected no matter what. Its a good idea to do it. It happens all the time. The pipes its probably approaching onto somebody elses property at this point. So that would have to be moved as well and maybe put inside the building. Okay. Thank you. Thank you. Is there any Public Comment on this item . Seeing none, commissioners, this matter is submitted. Commissioners. Well, we have a pretty narrow scope on this one and thats where the city intentionally or inadvertently caused the requester to be late, and from what ive seen and heard thats not the case. Would you like to make a motion . Either that or discussion i agree with our Vice President. The issue of notification, even if it was flawed, which i dont believe it was, i believe that the people next door were aware that this work was being performed and had the ability to participate in a discretionary review at the planning commission. Okay. Then ill move to deny the jurisdiction request on the basis i stated. Okay. So we have a motion from Vice President lazarus to deny the request on the basis the city didnt cause the requester to be late in filing the appeal. On that motion. [roll call vote] that motion carries 50 and the request is denied. We are now moving onto item number 5. This is appeal number 19108. Jennifer Plummer Daniel cabrera dawn hayes, tyler anyon Patricia Borrego and Benjamin Mckay versus the department of building inspection, 108 albion street. Issuing the appeal to albion street of an alteration permit commencingment of work not previously started under a previous permit. Retrofit per fbc chapter 34b engineering criteria per asce, including plywood walls, simpson strong walls and strong frame and grade beams permit 201908088266. Well hear from the appellant first. Welcome back. You are always so smiley and happy to be here. Well, commissioner i try my best to put on a happy face. Ill do my bust. Ill take that as a comment accomplishment that my face is sticking around in memory. Good evening. Im here tonight on behalf of the tenants at 108 to 118 albion street. They are sitting here behind me. Please take conversation out in the hallway folks. Stop the time please. Excuse me. You need to step outside. Theres no conversation while a hearing is going on. You are interfering with the process. Thank you. Sorry about that. Thats okay. It happens. So given just the sheer number of tenants tonight im going to keep my comments brief so they have time to speak. They are all here to speak about their experiences and what they have dealt with living under this landlord who has been aggressive, negligent and trying to force them out of their apartments. We are fortunate that we are all here together tonight having just recently beaten an eviction attempt but we are concerned this seismic retrofit, especially the manner of reasonableness consistencyre reviving anold permit seems like its trying to force them out. I want my clients to have two minutes each to speak and ill have a rebuttal afterwards. First person come on up. My name is Benjamin Mckay. This is my girlfriend Patricia Borrego. We have lived in our unit for quite some time. 2020 will mark 20 years patricia has been in the unit. [off mic] we did defeat in a Summary Judgment the eviction notice which for the last year and a half weve been battling with this. And it seems as though this is an end run around a failed attempt to evict. And displace us under the auspices of a temporary move from which we will probably never get back into our building. We are longstanding members of this community. We both work in government. Patricia works with nonprofits for county governments here in San Francisco and napa and sonoma. My previous employment was for a mail carrier for the federal government. We are San Francisco residents. We love this place. We love our place. Thank you for your time. Thank you. Hi, there. Im dawn hayes. Im at 112 albion street. And, you know the members of this building have acted in bad faith. They have sent workers in my building, in my apartment under the influence and drunk. And i was quite affected by that. A disabled woman right now. Ive lived there 26 years. Most of my adult life. And this feels like a ploy. This feels like a lastminute 11th hour ploy to get us removed from our homes. And i would have nowhere to go. Ive been in the community. I have also worked in the community doing social work, Substance Abuse counseling with the residents of this community. And i would appreciate you denying this. Thank you. Thank you thank you. Good evening everybody. My name is tyler anyon. Thank you for hearing our case. Ive been a tenant at 108 albion for over ten years. And this appears to me as the lastditch effort to get us out. And i appeal to you for thanks. Thank you. Thank you. Hi, my name is Jennifer Plummer and this is my boyfriend danny cabrera. So ive lived in 115 albion street for about 25 years. Ive had the privilege to make it my home. Ive had the privilege to be part of the Community Living and working in the community and caring about the community. This has been stressful and deceitful on the part of the landlord. I would just like to say lastly that about a month ago there was a man outside and he told us he was actually doing a survey of the building and wanted that the owners wanted to make apartments out of each of the garages not just seismic retrofit and they wanted to remodel the empty apartment to knock down the wall between the kitchen and living room. Its clear to me their intentions are not good ones. Thank you. As my partner said, my name is dan and i wanted to share that ive been working the better part of the last five years supporting and working for local nonprofits. I work primarily from home. And so i dont look forward to any possible disruptions. But that being said we just havent had a good experience with the landlord and the management companies, as youll see in the paperwork, they have been unprofessional with us. So im here to support my friends and my partner and my neighbors. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. As you heard from my clients ladies and gentlemen of the board, they are scared. Not really any other way to put it. They are scared because this landlord has treated them poorly. They are scared because this landlord has lied to them. And they are scared because now they are being told even in this letter submitted to the board dont worry, there wont be any attempt to try to get you out when everything they know about these landlords tells them otherwise. It includes notices of violation an order of abatement that had to be issued against the landlord and youve heard testimony from my clients to demonstrate to you that everything tells them theres nothing that makes them feel like they can take the landlord at their word and the only way they can be protected in their longterm homes so they can continue living there, continue having affordable housing, continue being a part of this community is with the help of this board and eyes over the shoulder of the landlord preventing this landlord from abusing his position of power. Thank you. Question. Can you explain when you mentioned failed eviction. Yes. Without going into too much detail, there was litigation going on for months and a previous lawsuit before that. The activations were dismissed after a victory in court as a result of a work of my cocounsel sitting behind here. She is a star, by the way absolutely amazing and myself and these tenants they all worked together to fight it because just like theyve mentioned, they are a community in that building and they would like to keep their home. Randy had nothing to do with that . No, no. Fair question but no. Thank you. Anybody else have questions . If not ill ask a question. So you will find no other people more concerned about displacing tenants than the five people sitting on this. I think our track record, at least as long as the years ive sat there will prove that. I need to hear however, not this is not a rent board. This is not a tenant society. This is about an application for a permit. So i am sure that we are going to hear from the project sponsor who is going to tell us its all legal and then we are going to hear from planning, and they are going to give us their opinion on legalities. And, you know, this is the sad thing about these projects not the sad thing, thats the wrong word. This is the real thing about these projects, that if the process is in place the permits have been properly filed, if there is compliance with regard to the code, then the project goes forward. That does not stop us from putting some conditions to make sure that the fears of your clients are supported with some structure. So i would like to ask you are there any legal issues related to the issuance of this permit that significantly are bothersome from a legal standpoint of the issuance of the permit . And i would like your opinion, i believe you put it in your brief, but i would like you to affirm that listing, of items or conditions that would make your clients more comfortable if this permit were issued to give them some strength and some support. Yes, mr. President. So first and foremost, in terms of the legal issue here its a matter of credibility. Its a matter of statements being made to this board and statements being made in this permit application. The permit application that respondent submitted with its letter include statements of what the work is supposed to be and statement about what the work is supposed to be on dbis website. The issue is credibility of those statements. The evidence weve submitted tonight in terms of the notices of violation, the sworn statements of my clients and their declarations and their sworn statements here all directly undermining that credibility. So im not going to sit here and lie to this board and say in addition to that theres a particular housing code section 23b 582 that im pointing to. It is a much more substantial and deepseated issue. It is a much more substantial and deepseated issue of the credibility of this landlord. And whats more, the credibility is further undermight bed by the fact that as oppose undermined by the fact that as on opposed by getting its own permit the original permit was actually expired. It was triaged in 2016. It almost feels like its so simple that are we sure its legal . Its incredibly important in legal significance. Credibility. Can we believe whats being stated in front of this body in these papers to dbi to planning. Did you get your question answered . I realize im i can go to the second point i need the answer to the second item, which is what are the you listed some safeguard in your brief. And i would like to service them to the public. Have you verbalize those so we are clear that weve heard them. Sure. Make sure first as the position we took in the papers indicated, we feel that trying to revive this permit is wrongful and therefore our initial position is to dismisthis dis dismiss this permit entirely. However recognizing this body might be more interested in imposing conditions rather than keeping the permit the conditions that would be important for my clients would be all aimed towards minimizing the impact while they are living there. First and foremost. Excuse me. I need to ask. Time, please. Can you take the conversation out of the courtroom please . Thank you. So the first point i would make for a condition is can you start the go ahead. First condition would be that and this is in line with what is being stated in these papers but we would rather have them memorialize the condition for the size rick retrofit that no evictions or displacements take place. That they are allowed to stay in their homes and not evicted. Second in advance of beginning the work providing proof of Adequate Funding to complete the project from start to finish, proof of license and boned bonn bonded contractors and proof they have the necessary permits. We need proof they are going to be providing dust and debris shielding keeping the premises safe. As one of my clients testified, she recovered from kidney failure. Its incredibly important to protect the health and wellbeing of these tenants. And that goes to the next point which is that given the age of the building and at least my own personal understanding of seismic retrofit proof of led and Asbestos Abatement or proof they have abatemen procedures in place ready to go. Its my understanding that asbestos is discovered frequently. I know in my own building. Just the list. Thank you. Thank you. Last, these clients need a line of contact for who to address issues to during the construction. Theres actually no specific person theyve been told they could contact for any issues that might come up. Would it be a Property Management company . Counselor keep it tight please yes. Last condition would be that for the duration of the work, working 8 to 5, five days a week, to keep the disruption to a minimum and keep the tenants that the last . Thats the last i had one more question. One of the tenants said they saw an engineer or someone taking photos regarding accessory dwelling unit. I dont see that anywhere in the paperwork. Are your clients protected under lease for the garage or Storage Space that is below . Is there garage or Storage Space . Yes and are those assigned according to lease . So one of my clients had garage and Storage Space use. Off the top of my head im not sure if it was originally in her lease or pursuant to a modification after the fact. But that is an agreement thats been in place for a number of years. I will get clarification from the project sponsor. Thank you. Any other questions . No, thanks we will now hear from the permit holder. Good evening and welcome. Thank you. So this is, as you are well aware the city mandates seismic retrofit for our class of building. It was to be done by i think september 15th. As we are getting close to that date, we had to figure out how we were doing this and the quickest way possible was to take an existing plan that was already approved and had our current contractor get another permit with that with those same plans. As you can see in the plans, this is just for seismic retrofit. There is nothing happening in the units. We just are trying to do what our city mandated work that we have to do on our building to keep it safe. I got a question. I think everyone does. So first off explain the ellis act procedure you did on the building. When we purchased the building, we filed the ellis act in june of 2018 in order to pull the property off the rental market so we could sell the units. And then it didnt work . It got canceled . You withdrew . There was a Summary Judgment that we lost. I think it was two weeks ago. Okay. Second question. Are you local San Francisco developers and do you have any projects other than this one in San Francisco right now . We do okay. And has this happened before . How many ellis acts have you done in other buildings . No, this is the first last question is that are you planning to do adus in this particular property . No, in fact there was an adu permit that was already approved and we had to go through the process of removing it and then rerecording or recording the removal on title okay. Thats all been taken care of why would there be an engineer or architect at the property saying that there is going to be Additional Units put in the garage . You know whatever work we are going to do on the building is going to be done after we have successfully the question is are you planning to do adus . No no, no, no. There was approved adus for the garage. And we removed it. We cant do anything with adus. And will there be displacement of the tenants . For this work . For this work no, not at all. Thank you. I have a couple questions. Unfortunately for whatever reason the plans that we got for pretty illegible. I dont know if thats a function of their age so it was difficult to determine, other than from the project description what work was happening and where it was. So it was difficult to determine the veracity of the statement that there would be no displacement of the tenants due to this work because you couldnt tell where this work was taking place. Can you describe the nature of the work and levels and where on the building the work will be taking place . Yeah. I apologize about that but i thought it was more important that you got the actual stamped approved plan. Which is definitely great. Its unfortunate that for whatever reason it was difficult to read. I can get copies from the architect. And i can send them to the board so that you guys can see. But really its everything the only level thats being done i mean you can see its existing, existing. Is there a sheet we should look at. The only thing that leave the dbi to have a good set. There is a good set. Thank you. Theres an overhead projector next to you if you want to display anything to show us what the work is. I guess its really just this. So its really this page that starts with a ground floor demo plan. Can you zoom out that . As if you are looking at it, sir. Thank you. You can open up the dbi. Got you. So its easier. This is the page where all the work is being done. Its all on the ground floor the garage area. And then it just goes into detail on what the simpson ties and sheer walls and all that. There are no dwelling units on that level . No, there are no dwelling units on that level have these plans been made available to the appellants . I have there was litigation ongoing until two weeks but have you discussed these plans with the tenants in person or in writing . No. Just once we got the appeal we followed the instructions and mailed them out to counsel as well as the tenants. You had a chance to hear some of the concerns the tenants were raising about the hours of operation debris, dust asbestos, led. If the work is going to be performed while they are there are there any issues that might occur on the garage level with dust, led, hours of construction . We are using a professional contracting company, 2040 services. They do city work. You might be familiar with them. Theyve done other work for us in other buildings for another project we have. They are very clean. They are very professional. I dont anticipate any problems. I mean, again, this is just to satisfy the soft story retrofit. And then do you have an estimate when the work begins, how long would the duration of the work be approximately . You know what, i would have to ask my contractor to see okay. Thank you. Yes. Do you have any issue with designating somebody, whether its you or somebody else representing the Management Company or contractor as a liaison for the tenants if there are issues . We have a professional Property Management company in place. And theyve been they have notified all the tenants as far as that they are the Property Management company. They would be the natural ones to talk to. They seem to imply there wasnt anybody that they could go to. There is. C d Reality Realty is the name of the Management Company. After the ellis act was filed and when we got to the 12month period and then filed an unlawful detainers, at that point the checks all had to go to our attorneys so that might be part of the issue. But our Property Management company did send out notices letting them know who is managing the company. Thank you. I have a question. Do you have a problem with the limitation on construction hours monday through friday to 5 . I dont think so. I think that would be fine. Thank you. Just to clarify you are jeff phillips, right . Yes, i am thank you. Nothing further. You can be seated. We will now hear from the Planning Department. Thank you. I dont really have much other than to say the permit was indeed withdrawn. Im somewhat confused because you cant get an adu permit if you have a building that has ellis act evictions so the timing and overlap is confusing but in any event it does seem the adu permit has been withdrawn and is no longer in effect and that withdrawal was done earlier this year. Thank you. Thank you. Im sorry. Mr. Sanchez. El jefe has a question. Have you reviewed the plans . No. The matter here is more under the purview of the department of building inspection. Do you see any issues with regard to compliance or anything related to in your purview with related to this issuance of this permit . Nothing related to the planning code can you help me with something . So the permit lay dormant for a while and now has resurfaced. Is there anything odd about that . What is your opinion with regard to whether the original permit should have been laid to rest and then reissued due to a change of ownership or any other change in the building . Nothing on that. These permits are reviewed by department of building inspection, not Planning Department. Okay, great. Thank you. Thank you. Well now hear from dbi. Enligh