It. Thank you, thank you. Ill work with you on the way to put that on calendar. Shall we call the next item. A subject property in the alley we got a letter from the Appellant Versus dbi decided on march 13 the board voted to uphold the vacancy it was properly issued it the antonio to a permit application and address the correction to union street to the alley number 2 as the commissioner mentioned he watched the video hose ready to participate mr. Bruno please step forward. I did not hear the commission. Thats; correct correct. Thank you for reading the material im march bruno the appellant ive asked this rehearing be granted for two reasons the liaison for the department of building inspection misinformed in a material way this board when asked about the notice of violations and what he said in response from a question from commissioner Vice President honda theres no notice of violation im quite sure when asked again by commissioner wilson he said there might be something but its been remedied he said no there are no novs there are complaints but no any novs in fact, at the time of that hearing there were 2 novs when you look at the history of that board and some of the circumstances it would at least placed conditions on the permit holder and the board got the corrected information it would have considered the matter devil the Department Representative told the board that in giving of notice to the resident of that building the only remit the prorld the whole idea it be given 3 days before the work begins 0 what happened then in this distanced you engrossed the material and given this information i as appellant because of nature of that process is not a typical trial process was not given a chance to rebutton so you heard this information by the dbi representative that reason i think as a matter of just it should be reherald so companies would be placed on the permit holder the attorney for the permit holder states in the opposition to today is rehearing request should have reseen his belief for the 18 he means the word conservative what person would assume a member of the bar writes conservative and states it twice, in fact, that man he referred to have is has conservative. Thank you. Well hear if the permit holder. Hello, im robert cowen with Business Owner stone and borrowing at the scene in essence the board has not told the board anything new that couldnt have been raised if there is is a mistake untenable by dbi no impact often the boards decision others board considered all the facts involving this permit and gave the right decision and i ask the board to deny this application for rehearing thank you thank you anything from the departments mr. Duffey. Commissioners joe duffy dbi i wasnt at the previous are hearing i believe that was the Senior Inspector cowen was here maybe his first time i read some of the testimony in the belief i think we decided this last week at the other hearing for there was two notice of violations one of the complaints by mr. Bruno is that the work was continuing despite the suspension that feels around the 24th of february and on the 25th of february we issued a notice of violation just informing the contractor that was at the building that the permit had been suspend open all work was suspend about i the board of appeals on noah valley there is a lot of work going on in different unit this notice of violation was issued on the 25th of february 2015 per the other notice of violation from the housing inspection serves for the lead paint i spoke on that as well that was dealt with by inspector yee they got warnings the notification for the lead paint requirement i spoke about that last week im not sure it would have made a difference but it was missed it may or may not have made a difference but the work per say ive not heard objections about usually appealing what is being done or the work its an quack of the failure of someone from dbi to give all the information regarding violations on the property there was two notices on the property im telling you about them now thank you. Be any Public Comment on this item . Seeing none, commissioners the matter is yours. Your thought madam president. I feel like i was aware of the novs particle the one having to do with the address that was corrected and thats correct. That didnt influence my decision nor the issue around the connecticut certificate so theres no reason to. The grounds for rehearing are quite clear ill deny the request for a rehearing. Nothing to add . You want to make that motion. Deny the request for the rehearing on the grounds that theres no new evidence. Theres a motion on the floor from the Vice President to deny this rehearing request commissioner fung that absence commissioner president lazarus commissioner wilson commissioner squiggle thank you the vote is it 4 to zero this rehearing request is did understand. Thank you. Well move on to item 7 pay versus the department of building inspection with the building inspection approval on third avenue protesting the issuance to kathy fox of an alteration with the Property Line total of 16 hundred square feet northwest elevation that frls heard on march 21st by the board and continued to allow the parties to continue to discuss resolution mined as commissioner squiggle and commissioner wilson youve reviewed the video for this. I have. Great, thank you. With the president s content well give the parties 3 minutes well start with the appellant is the appellant here appellant yes. Good evening im speaking my name is is tony ill speaking on behalf of my client theyve not come to an agreement with the properties and also, we would like to mention one thing on the response to from Fox Properties attorney mr. James on the record on exhibit 3 that everything it was signed by the approval permission to go into 691 to go into the skarld and fix the wall it is based on the note it was required by the city of San Francisco and on march 25th mr. Joe duffy has clarified it was not required by the city of San Francisco so based on this we say it is false information under that condition mr. Chang thats the reason he signed the note he was informed this way. Are you finished . Yes so how many conversations have you had with the representatives from fox companies. Once. What was that meeting like can you explain. Ms. Shade, mr. Changs daughter and i went to to his office and wanted to resolve the matter mr. Miller say well be no money paid to chang family so from the conversation up from the beginning to the very end we never mentioned about anything about money. So what were the concerns. The concern is right now as you can tell me mr. Chang is not present her house she needs to say or be hospitalization the daughter tried to resolve the subject matter before her moms health so it wasnt affected. The the new York Police Departments were useful. No, no negotiations. Okay. Thank you okay. Well hear if the permit holders. Good afternoon good evening, commissioners james representing the responding party of fox proposals the bottom line is that in those if youre wondering from our point of view what happened in those negotiations the bottom line we need assess tour your property and couldnt get a commitment for that and then where mr. Shoe left off were not going to do anything without compensation and we couldnt he said the meeting is over so as you can tell sort of by what is represented in afternoon by illnesses all valid points wed love to accommodate do Anything Possible weve also been fox is next door to those people for the lease thirty or 40 years always been friendly i dont know why this is go on all this is a permit to put siding to the side of the fox property next to their property thats the bottom line i wish we could have a settlement it explicit occur. Are you finished was there a dollar amount mentioned. There was not. In your mind if was a settlement what would that look like. Before its devolved into mom being sick that was basically the workers destroyed items in the backyard and left things dirty and i thought it was simply going to take the shape well indemnify. And well get in and out as quickly as possible the job for completion is less than a half of days of unfortunately, the skaifld has to go up to make it as pain also as possible but nothing was discussed. Mr. Duffy. Commissioners just on the we give us to dbi as well and gave a call to see how they can get the work done no one was let on the improvements if you want to on your property you have to go on the neighbors side unfortunately, sometimes it is not easy had people complain about things on the yard it is really its annoying and frufltd i wish those people would get together and unfortunately, sometimes you have to get a court order i believe im not an attorney that is unfortunate but it happens we want people to get into a property maybe someone went on to it and didnt do well, thats in my opinion that locals the work is 2 3rds of the way done and noted to get finished but an assess issue permit is fine. Mr. Huey this may have come up but the cities requirement will you address that that. I saw that note that unfortunately, i wish i hadnt of done that the city didnt require it i dont want to make a point of that this is between two private Property Owners the city didnt own the property sometimes, we issue emergency orders the city can do that this is not a case like that it shouldnt have been on there and the Property Management people know that maybe they got symthat information somewhere we cant force that unless it is a hazardous condition but typically no we courage people to work together. Thank you Public Comment is closed. Commissioners the matter is you yours. Youre the frank your frank today. I think this matter is going to be resolved elsewhere the permit was properly issued so my incollision to deny the appeal. Im on the one side of fence i do not like how the permission was obtained it indicates what looking at the pictures that were in the briefs you know you cant require someone or allow someone to use their property i mean, thats this is a neighbor a neighbor issue. But i dont know this is under the permit. Were addressing whether the permit was properly issued what happens after that is not necessarily our jurisdiction unfortunately. So robert what happens if we uphold the permit . Well, if you uphold the permit the two parties have to work out some arrangement it didnt get much further that president. Other comments ill move to deny the permit and uphold the permit that was properly issued. Mr. Pacheco. We have a motion on the floor if the president to uphold this on the bays basis it was properly issued commissioner fung is absent commissioner Vice President honda commissioner wilson commissioner swig thank you the vote is 4 to zero this permit it upheld on that basis. Next item item 8 susan versus the department of building inspection the property on 21st oath protesting the issuance on february 2015 of the penalty in position of a penalty of work done without a permit you have 7 minutes to present our case to the board. Thank you sorry im trying to get organized i want to give you a brief summary i was worried about a notice of violation in october and as soon as i got the notice of violation i went to dbi 8 times gathering the necessary information and trying to figure out you know what to do in february i got the necessary approvals to get the permit i also i havent paid it because as you can see from the is it correct to the last page appealings it is a Financial Hardship for me and also i would i guests mayor of the Building Code im claiming governance thats not an excuse im a regular person trying to clear my violations i mean i did not know i was doing anything wrong once i got the notice of violation i went to dbi to get the information and here we or so what im trying to ask is that for the board to reduce my penalties if times to 2 times i dont feel i should be penalized im doing the best i can bottom line id like to move forward im asking for reduction in penalty thank you. I have a couple of questions how long have you owned the property. Well my apartment and i own the property im thinking maybe at least 15 years. So and do you live on the property. I recently moved back in late 2012, 2013. So when was the work in question done. Well, part of work was done in i believe it was 2014 and i did minor remodeling of the kitchen and bathroom on the two story and the other work i believe in 2000 and that was done by my parents. When you do the work who performed the work for you a contractor, friend and contractor. And he didnt at this time inform you a permit was needed to do such remodeling to the house. Well, i dont know i really wasnt involved in 2000 okay. No more than because you were the one doing the 2014. I was responsible for the 2014 work, yes. I dont think he mentioned it i know i didnt ask i would familiar with. I understand thank you. I mean, now i know basically i have to i mean, you need permission from dbi for everything in the process so yep thank you. I think the department will clear up the other questions i have. I have one question on the questionnaire do you own other property in San Francisco you said, yes. I have a property on 30th and noreaga. Have i done remodeling of that property. Minor. Nothing to this extent. No. Nothing that required a permit. No. Thank you. Next mr. Duffy. Commissioners joe duffy dbi again, this the Building Permit that did penalty on to comply with the secondstory the kitchen counter top and slour are and remove the stove and board up that windows and the second permit is not contrary im not sure we had a notice of violation issued by the district inspector that was a result of a claimed on the 20th of july 2014 the complaint was actually for no permit for bathroom work for several weeks we got a second complaint an july 9th for bathroom and kitchen and complainant called on july 20th and we have a phone number for a person but we got in there and the inspector steve actually wrote a notice of violation on the 23rd of october size investigation for those two illegal dwelling units one with two windows that open directly into the garage and remodeling work was noted in the garage and laundry area exhaust duct and electrical on dprr ground floor and he said foiled a Building Permit to have one within 60 days and complete all work between 90 days the permit was a filed permit during the process of getting the Building Permit the permit it was issued for 90 thousand dollars a penalty by the inspector in october so that normally 9 times fee he valued the work at 40 thousand dollars so the penalty is in the region of 3 thousand 5 hundred and 83 plus cents the total fees are 6 thousand dollars plus it is about 50 percent of the permit fees and it is a high penalty it is for work done without a permit im not sure if the permit holder exhausted the penalties sometimes if someone comes in and says its not 40 thousand but 20 thousand your penalty is too high thats dealt with by the Senior Citizen chief building inspector or a Deputy Director it looks like the penalty was put on properly but it is a high penalty but it is thats what the codes tells us to do ill be happy to answer any questions if you have any. Go ahead. Mr. Duffy how many unit you said on the ground floor. The notice of violation we had that revealed to illegal dwelling units theres a main level and two illegal ground floor units. Lets see here yeah. One dwelling and single thats what the notice of violation reads ive not been to the site thats what the inspector is alleging i imagine we got a complaint of the remodeling of the kitchen the legal part of house and the inspector went there and i guess he saw the illegal dwelling units he knows this is a singlefamily and wrote up the work with the main floor garage level are included in this notice of violation. Yes. Yes and and probably came with the 40 thousand penalty and built without a permit i saw a permit in the 8 that adds storage