coming from the water shed center for the time being and the water shed center the payment is looking at at the engineering to trim costs on the water shed center. okay. any particular cause for the increase. i think there is so a lot of building construction throughout the city so public works they re saying the bids are over because of the construction that is going on throughout the city. okay. thank you. commissioners. yeah. i don t understand so the water shed - the education center what s it called. the water shed center. so the money that s where the money is going to come from. the additional 5 to 6 millions. is that going to jeopardizes this project. we ll won t have a water shed center but value the engineering and come up with a more efficient way of building or constricting constricting that. i think also there are other projects that may come in and have contingency or because that is a later. - 09 projects so the a gm is looking at th
properties and all three properties, were appealed and came before you, you might have a clearer opportunity to make a decision. commissioner melgar and walker? i have a question the letter from urita said a couple of things that were concerning firstly, in the letter the engineer, mr. rutia says that the wall actually is at risk of failure, which contradict s the testimony of the engineer, so i want your information on that. and the base of the retaining wall that drain onto the devisidaro property. i wanded you to clarify that that devisidaro property is the one that has not been sited, the one the weep holes drain into. third, there is an excavation scheduled for the washington street property to add parking, is that the washington property that decided? the neighboring property 2308 devisidaro. they did get a first notice of violation but because there were presentations made to the department it seemed reasonable, where it looked like the retaining walls and founda
the devisidaro property. this one is the washington property. our property sits here. this is the corner property they built a large garage. this shows in 1895, the washington property sits there. this shows a property in devisidaro. this shows on 1901, there is no building on the corner building the condition that we have been built there since the earthquake is conjecture and pure speculation. these walls are on our property, of course, they re encroaching on our property, but they re failing in the air, as vegetation and water is coming through the wall they re failing, and i will say that the washington street property the building on the wall i let their painters in four years ago to paint the top of their wall so they re saying the top of the wall is theres to maintain and paint but what they sit on is not there?s it doesn t make any sense. thank you for your time. may i see the exist? of course. can i approach? yeah. any questionses from the commissioners?
scheduled for the washington street property to add parking, is that the washington property that decided? the neighboring property 2308 devisidaro. they did get a first notice of violation but because there were presentations made to the department it seemed reasonable, where it looked like the retaining walls and foundations were only on the other two property then the department moved forward with those. okay. if that s rebutted in some way, have you a situation where all three come back before you the department can only look at what they see at this time. today, there may be additional information that could change appearance. in addition to the wall excavation have they pulled permits for that? there are no permits for any of these unsafe conditions. no, no, for the posed additional parking from the neighboring property do you have that letter from the property i do. risk of actual failure of that wall which sounds reasonable if there is excavation
third property that may be effected by this. right. are you addressing that issue? yes. that s what i m asking. is there something else to look at whether that third property is involved, in termses of property lines? because getting into property line issues is something we avoid um, the only change i could see if you send it back to the department would be having a discussion with the neighboring property. i acknowledge the situation you are in, you ve got two properties before you there is a third property that is being referred to but you are in the dark what is going on with that property. you are kind of at a disadvantage. if all three properties were before you, maybe it might make your situation more clear. right. right. that is not for me to say. i understand the city s options, and the department s options are limited, we don t like to get in the middle of neighbor disputes sometimes if all neighbors are held accountable, it forces them to deal with it