Building inspector joseph duffy will be here representing the department of beuilding inspection. The boards rules of presentation are as follows. Appellants permit holder and respondents are each given seven minutes to present their case and three minutes for rebuttal. People affiliated with these parties should make their statements within the three minute periods. Members who are not affiliated with the parties have up to three minutes each and to rebuttal. We ask that you speak into the microphone. You are asked to submit speaker cards but youre not required to when you speak. The board comments and welcomes your feedback. If you have questions about requesting a rehearing, the boreds hearing rules, please ask the staff before or after the meeting. Or come to our office. This meeting is broadcast life on sfgovtr cable channel 78 and will be rebroadcast friday at 4 00 on channel 46. There are dvds of this meeting available for purchase on sfgovtv. Please note that any member of the
Next steps. Typically new permit applications with plans. To look at this from the eyes of an inspector, the inspector realizes theres a disconnect between the architect and the engineer for the project, theres a miss alignment between the plans. The inspector realizes the structural drawings are showing the compliance with code for structurally potentially fire resistant walls and weatherization. It speaks to the disconnect we find there and that comes from the project Design Professionals and percolates down to ending up with something that is maybe a little beyond but, you know, some of them we see a little bit beyond, but again, the universe with 49 hopkins projects, its pretty small. Just want to make that clear. I spoke about the facade, its not difficult to preserve stuff like that. Shoring and bracing. We dont see any reason as inspectors why it cant be preserved and then going back to the code perspective, its better to upgrade the areas of the building not visible right away.
Controls, he is the administrative assistant. I am cindy gold, the boards executive director. We expect cory teague to be here. Hes the assistant zoning administrator, and senior building inspector joseph duffy will be here representing the department of beuilding inspection. The boards rules of presentation are as follows. Appellants permit holder and respondents are each given seven minutes to present their case and three minutes for rebuttal. People affiliated with these parties should make their statements within the three minute periods. Members who are not affiliated with the parties have up to three minutes each and to rebuttal. We ask that you speak into the microphone. You are asked to submit speaker cards but youre not required to when you speak. The board comments and welcomes your feedback. If you have questions about requesting a rehearing, the boreds hearing rules, please ask the staff before or after the meeting. Or come to our office. This meeting is broadcast life on s
That. Monetary penalties as were saying are typically small based on work valuations. What does add to the penalties is the Code Enforcement fees and orders of abatement, that takes it into thousands of dollars for assessment of Code Enforcement. Referral to the City Attorney for litigation and possible financial penalty, we have evidence of that here. Our unlawful demolition code prohibits the project from proceeding for five years, in consideration of 317 of the planning code, where theres a bit of a contractor. I think whats important to understand about our code section regarding unlawful demolition, it states when no demolition permit is in place, the unlawful demolition and five years would kick in. But just bear in mind, these jobs have significant permits. They have hopkins had a 650,000 permit. There was demolition shown on it. I would suggest the unlawful demo is probably more tailored to the guy who gets the Kitchen Remodel permit and takers down the building. He has no demo
Street, conditional use authorization is proposed for continue wants to february 8, 2018. Item three, at 1713 yosemite avenue, conditional use authorization is proposed for continue wants to march 1. Item four, at 479 28th street. Conditional use authorization is proposed to continue continuance to march 1, 2018. And case number five at 1815 mission street. Large project authorization has been withdrawn. I have no other items proposed for continuance and i have no speaker cards. Great. Thank you, jonas. Any Public Comment on the items being proposed for continuance . On sfgov tv overhead, please . Hello. Frank gladstone. This is regarding four, 28th street. I represent the Property Owner. Were requesting continuance until march 1. Im pleased to tell you that the adjacent neighbour whos most opposed to this by the name of annemarie zabala was kind enough to write this email to the staff. And its here on the overhead, indicating her agreement to a march 1 continuance. The plans were show