So to be truthful about the whole situation i never talked the kitchen it was promised to me she asked bob to add a new bath someone figured out lynn needed to go she could going get more money for the room so 75 hundred was not enough with that many amenities so lets get rid of lynn and just give it to me anyway she could thats why i got temporarily restrained it doesnt work so lets be truth about the whole situation i have no where to go as far as in some situations trying to arrange another place to live ive working but i shouldnt be forced out as a tenant and go be on disability i should be able to live the way the contract says thats how i feel she signed the contract she should fulfill it. And especially as far as the rent board a mediation we were going to do that so ms. Es have been. Okay i can ask them did they ever see me actually building that room i did not im legally blind i cant swing a hammer did they actually see me building that room . Did they actually see me down whether there when bob was building the room and bob was her friend bob was the one who brought her into my house because she has no place to go and i felt sorry for her and she i can i was so mad at bob, i havent paid him a penny because he promised me he was going to build a legal room not an illegal room if i wanted to do illegal things my other you know the rest of any building would be illegal i took anti permits there were properly built the downstairs the two businessmens and basket was properly built in 1993 i took out permits and properly built it why was i go ahead and build a dinky little room if the garbage without a permit i wouldnt do that myself as i removed that room ill have two parking space in the garage i have a big quite a big garage there so and then im sorry the rent board thing should be not here were in mediation only reason i drop her rent further because i felt sorry for her so for two months shell be paying me 300 a month then back to 400 a month thats my arrangement with the rent board now jeff is different once jeff say that lynn got rent concession he started doing the same thing he is he wanted me to drop his rent because the offstreet in front of any house my husband parked there and he didnt get to park there but thats offstreet parking first come, first serve not mine to give all take away thats the tenants im dealing with. Okay. So im just asking you to allow me to perform my permit. Your time is up i have a few questions. As my fellow commissioner asked theres a timeline issue im trying to solve. Im sorry. As i understand lynn was a tenant upstairs you loud her to move upstairs where im having confusion on the second tenant he stated that is not a shared it was not going to be a shared kitchen and bath that was a temporary situation. Sir, i advertised two bedrooms for rent. And he never promised there would be no shared kitchen and bath. From the very beginning he knows he knew he had to share a bath or bathroom and kitchen i turned on me payroll he didnt tell his partner kathleen that was the arrangement and kathleen got mad at him. The other point he mentioned of guaranteed an offstreet parking space and why dont you, you go to sfmta i cant get in myself. In the lease it didnt state there was offstreet parking. How can i promise something i cant give. Do you have any questions. Anything further from the departments . No, im sorry your time is up. Scott sanchez Planning Department so you know before the hearing, i discussion with the permit holder kind of our zoning lazy were briefly she had a question about the inlaw units i asked if theres a kitchen on the ground floor she told me know i maybe mistaken the other tenants said theres a separate kitchen he eye on the ground floor i dont know what the facts are but certainly, if theres a dwelling unit on the ground floor the board knows the kitchen is the key to that so if that kitchen hadnt exist for more than a year it could be level for a second inlaw unit that allows for the removal of offstreet parking so theres a question of the fact certainly what theyre doing they seem to be doing removing a room does not in and of itself to be an issue but there are maybe greater issues a second inlaw unit on the property so those are some of the other issues you know the facts are not all apparent at this time. If were going to deal with the matter at hand there are there other issues whats the best course of action. Typically we not issue a permit the department of building inspection was not issue a permit if theres outstanding violations one option to continue this matter and to see that the ground floor is inspected and but in this case if theres an illegal second unit then they will have the probability there are standards that need to be met but in this case they cant legalize it that will require a removal of the kitchen if you want to issue that that board will be able to resolve. You know the people renting or going to be out of housing if we adhere to the code the renter asking is going to be out of money. If those issues come before us and i mean over the years ive seen many cases with the illegal units and now more tools to allow coming before this board and didnt exceed the decency of the building but now theres potentially a path towards legalization that may or may not be something that the permit holders wants to pursue so they maybe interested in a continuance if it allows them to somehow legalize the second unit but that doesnt get to the issues thats a second units with a shared kitchen and bathroom theres no way to add now a third unit essentially you can legalize one that existed for morning a year or remove it. There will be two tenants not 4 correct. Questions. Well, id like to hear from mr. Duffy a final comment. Commissioners my concerns would be more that i heard the theres someone living in the room ive not seen plans i dont know if increase egregious or ventilation worried about a life safety what does this room its in the garage ive seen one built behind the garage door and one cigarette butt set back im sorry, i dont have the plans im concerned someone is living in a room and were thats probably my thoughts to add to that. I think were suggesting there be an inspection of some kind of. If we could are more specific on the condition that exists i could probably get the plans but certainly allowing the continuous of this and someone living in that if theres not proper e impressing if i take it a bedroom. I would think the left hand lady with about concerned about it also. Questions. Anything else mr. Duffy and one other thing the violation first notice of violation with this board action i dont know if that means well not be noticing a second violation typically thats what happened were on a time limit thirty days and 60 days for getting one, if its before the board it will hold it. It will be stated. Im not sure thats correct my understanding is abatement goes forward even when their appeals and in the dbis discretion. I spoke to the owner earlier and she applied for the purpose an extension but if the time when its going through i wanted to state that thank you. Thank you commissioners the matter is submitted. What a fun night yeah. We could have continued the whole evening. Go ahead. Im all ears. This is a bigger issue than we thought it was somehow empower dbi to evaluate the situation and report back to us. On tuesday dbi needs to review exactly what is the situation there or, and, secondly, what is the potential life safety issues facing the ground floor construction i can arrange for that to happen i what do you want a complete evaluation. Of what. Of the ground floor. I would think so. Theres two units or 3. Thats what i think it happening well end up going if we didnt notice that we were out there for the walls that are constructed the inspector could have went back there further and saw more the more i get into there you see everything if we get back there theres a kitchen if its a singlefamily home its an illegal units so that is all on the table now. It has astonish be. Okay. Thats fine. Open to per verbal. Before well issue a notice of violation ill not do that before the next hearing though. So i do we want to get this define as mr. Duffy the bo okay. Thank you. Does that sound right. To allow dbi to continue the inspection do you want to make sure that january 21st will work with the parties . Ms. Mar and ms. Es have an january 21st are you available to return . Maam, january 21st a wednesday inaudible . Come back to the microphone please. Thats okay. I have a plan family remy own with my sister in australia and when. Three weeks im spending the new year. When will you be returning. If we can move to christmas and after january. After january. January 28th. Will you be back by then and im make sure i come back by then. Okay. I amend the motion to january 28th. You mean i cant take it out until then . The permit is. And that room is not finished it has no windows im sorry, i cant speak from the room in the garage is not finished and has inform windows i dont think it is safe for her to live there for that long. We are asking the department to ascertain that. Thats a long time and theyre to come out long before that. Okay. And have our cooperation. They can come and you can workout that with them. Ms. Mar january 28th is that a date is that our motion commissioner president lazarus. Okay. Motion from the president to continue this matter until january 28th, 2014, the public hearing has been held the continuance to allow the dbi to conduct an inspection of the lower floor. Yes. On that motion commissioner fong Vice President is absent commissioner honda commissioner wilson is absent the vote is 3 to zero it is continued to there january 28th thank you okay. The next and last item on the calendar is item 9 appeal Paul Mccartney la miller vs. The department of building inspection with the building approval on Caesar Chavez street for the issuance of 2014 to held an alteration permit to disconnect the refrigerator to dont worry about unwarranted rental units and revered back into the lower flat start with the appellants attorney mr. Crow you have 7 minutes. Good evening staff and members of the board im david crow i represent the appellant Pamela Miller its past my bedtime ill try to make this short as i wrote in our brief ms. Miller applied for black book notification on to parcel 2014 mrs. The permit holder filed a Building Permit application on may 7th ms. Millers application for the note was processed on may 5th, 2014, but the planner reviewing the permit of dbi was not aware of the black book notice i state in the brief we ms. Miller received this information and she emailed mr. Sanchez and then later the permit was suspended by the department of planning we because the permit was initially issued we, of course, had to appeal it in order to were actually going there to process ms. Miller filed for a discretionary review on june 13, 2014, weve been postponing this hearing a couple of the to await the planning xhagsz commissions ruling on the discretionary review and on august or october 23rd they Planning Commission voted to take review and disapprove the permit i just received the permit holders reapply today, i read through it briefly and not prepared to respond but of i were this is a situation where the permit holder should be appealing the Planning Commissions ruling back here at a later date rather than using the process to essentially ask for an appeal of the Planning Commissions decision so i think that you have to understand any sort of testimony received now regarding from the permit holder is more proper in the proper procedure to appeal the Planning Commission decision arrest the other point ill make i had surely no chance to reapply to the brief that i received from the permit holder and the permit holder was not allowed to submit to the board i want to tell you that i will obtain to that untimely submission as we speak a late and b not time to rely and c irrelevant because of the Planning Commission decision on october 23rd thank you. I think kind of a procedural question is this before the flying permit or project has been. Cancelled about the the planning. Its not cancelled about the the Planning Commission because the matter is before the board so the Planning Commission it was the cart and the horse getting mixed up and the Planning Commission is expressed its desire but not the priority. Its been reserved. Thank you because it has been continued 3 times we aired and not calendar the reapply at my office we put together a reply on the committees decision on october 30th the same day the brief was due ill request to give a late brief because i want to talk about the exhibit attached to my brief i was told if you let me i can present it today at the hearing. You have our opportunity to discuss it. Yeah. I wanted to point to one exhibit on my. You can do that as part of your presentation but were not taking can i look at it. You can use the overhead. Were not going to have time to go through the whole i want to show it to you. Okay. The permit holder and the project sponsor is actually a trustee of the deceased and he represents the beneficiaries he is the permit holder because hes a neighbor and friend of the deceased owner shes not around and his job he took it on he knew that was going to be is an easy process to sell a two unit building that hell la lived in the bottom flat it is on Caesar Chavez and its a two unit building its interesting theres two flats that compose the front building theyre vacant because hilda died and theres evictions from the building and small cottage which is a sub structure that is in the back its known as 3828 Caesar Chavez its considered an adjunct space to the lower flat there was appraisals and records this this is considered a two unit building and the space considered an adjunct space and meertsd together the water and electrical utilities are metered together and ms. Campbell treated ms. Miller she was living in her house and the appraisal show this was considered part of the lower units space so this is how it is metered and treated for decades now ms. Miller has resided there since 2006 and her rent is 1,400 many campbell never increased it and the gentleman desires it to be easy to rent it as the legal description which is a two unit flat with an adjunct space that belongs to the lower unit in this case obviously ms. Miller didnt want to vacated and the permit was the scope of the permit to remove the kitchen and it will be a space important a bedroom living room or deny or whatever it is connected to the lower space shes filled the appeal to prevent the trustee 80 from doing that the trustee doesnt want to and at this point didnt have the money to go throw the nebulous procure of legal listing a unit to the mayors derivative is the correct authority for San Francisco at this point at this point its not right to because the drive for 3 units or more if you think about it the policy two units or less is an