Of the 2010 San Francisco building code. I sympathize with the fact that the owner was getting water in their house, and, you know, any of us would want to remedy that situation. My thoughts are that it would have been probably better had been would bei, and i, for glad to go out there and look at the situation, give them advice regarding waterproofing or what permits would be necessary. And its really unfortunate to see this structure that was taken down. So i leave it in your hands for decision on the penalty. Im available for any questions. How old . 198096 . Thats what was mentioned on the notice of violation. And some of the pictures in the materials yeah, i see them. Show or indicate that its an old structure. Okay. Vice president fung youll get a chance for rebuttal after the departments. Is there any Public Comment . Okay. Seeing none, then we can take rebuttal. Thank you. This is all very new to me, and i do currently have an architect thats working with me to come up with a s
and when i met with the i met with someone i came to the planning department to meet where someone who gave me the violation to find out what he needed to do, and he helped me get through the process and i was aware that i needed the permit when the came down because during the storm this year it started raining raining. you provided written statement and pictures. once the workers were up there we were going to flash and fix the tower but it was very unstable and not built very well. and so i made a hasty decision to have it taken down, trying to fix something that was broken, and i didn t want it to fall off and i didn t want it to fall off the building. to it s in the works now. so i m just asking to have the violation fee reduced. that s a pretty substantial structure. were you aware that you would need a permit to remove it? no. thank you. thank you. mr. o reardon. good evening, again, commissioners. patrick o reardon, dbi. a complaint 2012, 17641 was f
mainly for the purpose of having planning approval. so they now have a site permit which has been approved, but not issued, and we are here, i guess tonight, to deal with the penalty issue. the nine times penalty is required for work performed without permit per table 1-a-k of the 2010 san francisco building code. i sympathize with the fact that the owner was getting water in their house, and, you know, any of us would want to remedy that situation. my thoughts are that it would have been probably better had been would bei, and i, for glad to go out there and look at the situation, give them advice regarding water-proofing or what permits would be necessary. and it s really unfortunate to see this structure that was taken down. so i leave it in your hands for decision on the penalty. i m available for any questions. how old? 198096? that s what was mentioned on the notice of violation. and some of the pictures in the materials yeah, i see them. show or indicate
planning approval. so they now have a site permit which has been approved, but not issued, and we are here, i guess tonight, to deal with the penalty issue. the nine times penalty is required for work performed without permit per table 1-a-k of the 2010 san francisco building code. i sympathize with the fact that the owner was getting water in their house, and, you know, any of us would want to remedy that situation. my thoughts are that it would have been probably better had been would bei, and i, for glad to go out there and look at the situation, give them advice regarding water-proofing or what permits would be necessary. and it s really unfortunate to see this structure that was taken down. so i leave it in your hands for decision on the penalty. i m available for any questions. how old? 198096? that s what was mentioned on the notice of violation. and some of the pictures in the materials yeah, i see them. show or indicate that it s an old structure. oka
tonight, to deal with the penalty issue. the nine times penalty is required for work performed without permit per table 1-a-k of the 2010 san francisco building code. i sympathize with the fact that the owner was getting water in their house, and, you know, any of us would want to remedy that situation. my thoughts are that it would have been probably better had been would bei, and i, for glad to go out there and look at the situation, give them advice regarding water-proofing or what permits would be necessary. and it s really unfortunate to see this structure that was taken down. so i leave it in your hands for decision on the penalty. i m available for any questions. how old? 198096? that s what was mentioned on the notice of violation. and some of the pictures in the materials yeah, i see them. show or indicate that it s an old structure. okay. vice president fung: you ll get a chance for rebuttal after the department s. is there any public comment? ok