>> good morning. today's wednesday, may 15, 2024, and this is regular meeting of abatement appeals board/building inspection please mute yourself in you're not speaking. >> roll call. >> president chavez here. >> vice president neumann here. >> commissioner alexander-tut. >> commissioner shaddix here

and commissioner wilson and commissioners commissioner sommer is excused we have a quorum. >> next i'll administrator administer the oath of it was will all parties please stand and raise your right hand. do you solemnly swear or affirm the testimony you're about to give will be the whole truth and nothing but the truth? >> thank you you may be seated. >> and next, we have our land acknowledgement. acknowledgement. unceded ancestral homeland of the ramaytush (rah-my-toosh) ohlone (o-lon-ee) who are the original inhabitants of the san francisco peninsula. responsibilities as the caretakers of this place, as well as for all peoples who reside in their traditional territory.

ramaytush ohlone community and by affirming their sovereign rights as first peoples. >> thank you. >> um, next for the public comment call in information my members attending remotely. >> public comment call-in: 1 (415) 655-0001 / access code: 2661 668 3773. >> >> to raise your hand for public comment on a specific agenda item press *3 (star three) when prompted by the meeting moderator. and also desktop/laptop: https://bit.ly/49ugg5u click the link to join the meeting - password 0515. >> and next just for everyone information regarding today's hearing the time allowed for the

department and members of the public and appellant as possibly the department presents its first case each side has 7 minutes and next public comment limited to 3 minutes per speaker and lastly, a rebuttal time of three minutes for the department and the appellant. >> yes. >> and um, you would any comments by commissioners? >> i'm on it. thank you. >> i just wanted to give a quick disclaimer i know henry will be pc we have no contact or discussions on the items i'm confident i can make a vote based on what i'm seeing and not on anything else. thank you.

>> thank you. >> . okay. >> next item >> next item discussion and possible action to adopt the minutes for meetings held on: march 20, 2024, and april 17, 2024. public comment. is there a motion to adopt the minutes? >> motion to adopt the minutes. >> do i have a second? >> second. >> um, is there any public comment on the minutes? >> seeing none, all commissioners in favor, aye. >> >> opposed? thank you. the minutes are approved. and um, next before we get to the item regarding the item c there are 5 cases to be presented today i'd like to ask the appellant or representative

to come forward. >> this is not to present your case i need you to come to the mic. >> yeah. >> okay. i'm going to read the cases and then ask questions. okay. >> sure. >> so this is item c-1 through 5 discussion and 5 discussion and 5 discussion and 11th ave. - complaint # 202033422 owners of record & appellant: gundogdu tony mehmet appellant's representative: henry karnilowicz. henry karnilowicz. henry karnilowicz. seeks to “defer order of abatement for 180 days as consultant hired by owner stated that permits were issued whereas in fact they were not.” um.

>> and for the i'll read the addresses for the remaining cases and the case no. case no. 6920311-11th avenue, case no. 6921, 311-11th avenue, and cases case no. 6922, 311-11th avenue and case no. 6923, this is the the 311-11th avenue same party and owner and the appellants representative are the same like to ask the representative mr. karnilowicz if you're okay with the board to hear those a cases at the same time. >> yes. i thank you. >> okay. okay. you may be seated. >> okay. >> thank you and wanted to acknowledge that for the record. >> so next have the department

come forward please to present the case. >> this is ready to use. >> yes. it is. >> there it is. >> okay. >> gum commissioners and everyone attending this meeting i'm joe the senior building

inspector do i have 5 pillow cases against the same property i'll present those pillow cases he separately and attached to independent violation cases. let's start with the first appeal case case no. 6919 for complaint # 202033422 property address 311-11th avenue lot number 144 three without number 001. property division two-story type 5 building was a hotel are working together 14 guests rooms and so um, the - case summary of

something building inspector issued an property owner on may 2020 due to unauthorized interior pay attention within going once, going twice commercial says that the permit is in the far end stage due do not owner failed to comply the case has gone to code enforcement for specific a director thing was scheduled for may he 2021 the officer for issue an order of abatement are working together the condition to comply are working together that must be complete is final inspection for pay for all code enforcement fees and as possibly of today um, (clearing throat) actually um, a year after the

order of abatement was issued owner obtained permit on may 5, 2022, to address the violation but this permit has on a been completed the inspection. and in my conclusion the department staff to post the order of abatement and assessment costs due to the fact the order of abatement issued in three years ago was accurate. thank you. >> okay. you want to do that. okay. sure. >> u - the second appeal case

for today case no. 6920 complaint # 202173261. this violation um, was the code violation mini minnesota. >> minnesota. >> - it comes to focus.

>> yeah. >> okay. this exhibit was for the inspector the department inspector was installed at the ceiling of the going once, going twice open space and permit. - the inspection permit. >> exhibit no. 4 that during the oasis installed at the ceiling was installed without permit. the third case i'm going

to present case no. 6921, complaint # 202173268. this violation i'm going to show the exhibit. >> number 5 exhibit no. 5 this violation is from the second floor residential area that was a hotel apartment the violation is pertaining to the unauthorized dissemination and also the finish plumbing installed in the guest room number 5 and number 9. so

exhibit no. 6 that shows the kitchen has been installed in guest room number 5 in conclusion, this appeal number case no. 6921 is building inspector for a violation for an unauthorization of a kitchen are working together a guest room

(bell ringing) case no. 6922 complaint # 202172642 for today before continue i'd like to ask permission to lend me additional time than 7 minutes we only have one case we have your permission? >> yes. >> thank um, success is a the fourth case corresponding to complaint # 202172642 and this violation is representative for the plumbing annuled in the are working together the residential unit for which is the building violation. okay. >> so i'm going to present the last case for today the

electrical violation and going to show exhibit number 9 and 10. >> this exhibit let me show the violation number. appeal case case no. 6923 the fifth case, complaint # 202173081 and appeal of violation for 11, 2021 this was a violation so case in the slide show the electrical surface and electrical surface

sflaurl in the exterior wall that electrical violation for the prior building. so as possibly of today none of the permits has objected a final inspection just a violation that concluded my presentation for the 5 cases. thank you. >> appellants representative please come forward. >> hi commissioners agent for the owners this will be a long starting with the commercial space on the going once, going twice where it is converted to

three spaces to one and correctly eventually got around to make it a single-space and could not separate those spaces were downstairs took a while to go through planning to do that that way and would have preferred united states to break down that from commercial to residential that's not what happened moving on to today nothing has been done to comply. quickly i'll go over specialist items of the one 4 - the case and the utility room dph you'll

see there. um, and on the violation notice for 5 and 9 utility room without a permit and to install a water heater bottom line we have to permit one that was signed off for water heaters and another signed off on september 28th of 2022. and the permit number is p w-20220905623. >> i pass this around. and we

also have a parking permit for installing plumbing for plumbing fixtures on the second floor on as possibly necessary. now this was suspected and restated um, and all of the work not done, however, a permit was issued and showing was issued i think we'll have to get a new permit it is expired. permits for that.

(rustling of papers.) next, we have 268 this is for bathrooms being constructed on the second floor for 5 and 9 and trustee kimbell storage room, etc. possess owners want to make the sros better for the tenant putting the bathrooms inside of rooms and in the past some tenants may use and only a wash

basin in the rooms it is hard to do it in the space the permit we got the building permit that concluded in the bathrooms but one of them the owners talking about tenants moving and no way teu move out to do the bathroom 0 looks like to revise the drawings and the bathrooms done on the second floor it is true i had an inspection the other day and need to come back for the plumbing to get it signed off that being said, and it is related the - the other case no. n-422 is related to this too and

a file regarding the construction at a new petition for the commercial space again, this is for the commercial space and 12345e6d braking it into three units and ended up in a permit for one commercial space which is not quite nice for the area so that is all done and - so we have a permit that is issued um, and i have it here permit number 2, 02010217081. and i'll pass this around. >> and can you pass these

around please for the building permit the one we emerged two floors the first floor and second floor and we have to revise the drawings and go to planning. um, i don't know how long that will take to that we have been working are working together planning could take months to get it through so that being said, we'll have to take it through them and see how long it takes to for the include that one bathroom. so that is that. case 261 dph for the permit in

the ground for the commercial space without permit mechanical if you are news that violation that peels it out are working together the plumbing for 288 bathrooms and permit that is signed off by plumbing for bathrooms. which is this over here. now on the furnace we have a permit for the if you are news and if you are we have permits for those um, the electrical had

been signed on for the first floor so we should be good are working together that. >> okay. last case we have here ending are working together 081 electrical equipment wiring are hazardous and back to that 515 north lake avenue and systems are hazardous to human life that is safety and electrical permit for the electrical service. we have a permit that shows this work was complete a signed off. which is -

(rustling of papers.) over here. >> as you can see, we have been moving along and keep in mind we're faced are working together - [off mic.] >> you know, are working together the sros is difficult for the buildings you have people living in there during the day and it is jaw tough really tough to try to make that better for them at the end of the day, just takes forever not to mention the permitting took a while for planning and meetings and all that sort of stuff and issues are came up used to be in is on the ground floor at the

end of the day, what we're looking for time to be able to comply and get things finished up we have the permits a matter of getting corrections made and signing off and done i think that closes my testimony on for all those cases. thank you. >> if you have any questions? >> we have - >> yeah. >> that um, what was provided was not particularly provided but whether or not my motion to accept any or all of these. >> now related? [off mic.] >> do you have a pen?

>> thank you [off mic.] >> yeah. >> okay. so for the director and the city attorney can be a motion to accept or expend not accept the items. >> i need a pen yeah, we want to make sure that the department also got copies of this joe. >> yes. williams and i gave them to staff. >> maybe just [off mic.] >> like had enough time. >> is this rebuttal? >> i believe rebuttal. >> you can give the department, you know, time to review the documents they can um, respond or have a - >> yeah. that's fair. >> can you come up to the mic.

>> my request to recheck the documents appellant provided during the hearing and packet or statement? >> you can ask questions but consider and asks for the results of parties about the documents and then you can make a motion on whether or not to accept any of them. >> okay. a commissioner wilson so before we move to accept. >> speak into the mic. >> sorry. >> i like the appellant just decide and testify about the

authenticity of those one form of permit is appears an official are working together the ceo and the sfoufl and the others are um, appear for printouts from somewhere discuss where those came from and give us us the ability to weigh those authenticity and credibility. >> i comment some of those are on dbi website and others are printed out are working together the dbi staff. >> dbi staff had access to that well. >> okay. >> yeah, we would have had the ability to look this up.

>> correct. >> one of the electrical permits the last site visit was in march and done march 21st both should have done a more updated review and still. >> excuse me - >> status as possibly to whether or not the permits expired. >> a brief permit status of those permits. >> okay. >> go ahead. >> anybody have any questions? [off mic.] >> status of. >> sorry is there am i missing that is there a date on those documents to say when they were

assessed? or as possibly of what date? >> please let me know when i'm ready foreclose additional information. >> you look at the plumbing permit was printed on may 10th before 4:00 a.m. >> and the ones printed in the website don't have the time stamped on them. >> the plumbing permit is the city field bottom line? (rustling of papers.) i have a question for the um, the department. and um, super if

you have a chance i believe in our oh my god, o opening statement one of the permits processes have not been finally approved i believe on some of these i'm wondering and requesting for you to testify as possibly to the final status of those permits because (clearing throat) in the top column for most of these action dates and issuance completeness expiration can you testify as possibly is status of each of those the current status for each of these permits. >> (clearing throat). >> do we move into the questions now or i don't know what the procedure is not to make sure we're not jumping public comment and p want to make sure you're questioning. >> for the city attorney to

clarify. >> it is question to be moved to whether or not the fees i thought that commissioner wilson question. >> yeah. >> whether or not. >> (multiple voices). >> yeah, well yes. i guess before a.d. mit those want to know these are fully the prints outs and have dates as possibly to the stages of issuance of permits add mit them to make sure the permits are completed or in the process of being completed. >> my understanding we're still discussing that. >> i want to make sure we're not jumping into the questions before. >> so my question - um, i

suspect that if these. >> can we. >> those documents are being provided. >> i think we should have this conversation among ourselves. >> i'm not asking. >> >> (multiple voices.) >> look the department are you stipulating i want to give the department a chance to add mit those documents about the departments taken on- >> (multiple voices). >> to clarify deputy city attorney sarah fabian it is unusual but to decide whether or not. >> correct also i want to i believe the department has you are objecting to that. >> right. >> that is correct. >> and up to the commissioner

discretion to accept or not. >> my other discretion is there anything in addition to the specifically within the documents also otherwise obtainable. >> it will be easier to move forward and the, emphasis i want to make focus to the hearing for the appeal of about the order of abatement back in 2021 you guys have seen the orders from up to that date and after the data year after and up to day on a order of abatement issued can't finish all the permits. okay. some requires additional inspection and the discretion for including plumbing and

mechanical don't have a clear indication of the area and that maybe this building has two stories and ground floor and experimental and second floor they have violations on the first floor and second floor this permit is not in a specific area and basically i'm not 100 percent sure they're addressing the area the violation. and the reason why we are here today wrond to the appellant that against the order of abatement not accurate the issuance but i will say this is accurate but back three years ago. >> commissioners. >> any other questions? >> no i'd like to motion is on the floor for the document i'd like to make a motion we can

talk about the permits outs they are incomplete not we don't have the full permit in front of us and not had the chance to completely digest the information and both parties can speak cacth to the status of permit and the information might be relevant without add mit its incomplete some of those are kit off i don't know when they were printed out ahead of time and in addition i don't think it is - it gives us the information to comply that in may of 2021 for the correct action that's my position to reject. >> is there a second? on that

motion? >> i'll second. >> okay. and so dollars a motion and second to not accept the permit documents is there public comment on this motion? >> seeing none, roll call vote. >> president chavez yes. >> vice president neumann, yes. >> commissioner alexander-tut, yes. >> commissioner shaddix, yes. >> commissioner wilson, yes. that motion carries unanimously. and on the next i'll do we're on to public comment. can i do public comment on all the cases numbers if i want. >> this is call for public

comment on case no. 6919. okay. >> public comment for case no. 6919. >> can have the overhead please the projector. >> it will good morning. i'm jerry i live in the district familiar with that building. on clement street and chavez if you go to the property information the planning department you'll find this property has a ridiculous history. so there are 12 complaints for this year year i'm to page through it and show you how many complaints there are and okay. >> so as possibly we learned

in prior meetings at $400 an hour dbi has spent a fortune and get to the permits some of the permits as possible was the structural engineer i'll not go into the history but currently it federal prison the next is bathroom remodel in-kind unit 2 no structural changes no change inlay out. this was revoked you see the reason there is no existing bathroom. so the idea this property owner should be cut slack defies logic. thank you. >> public comment for case

no. case no. 6920. >> any in-person remotely? >> public comment for case no. 6921? >> um, to public comment remotely or in-person? public comment for case no. 6922? no public comment? and case no. 6923 public comment, in-person, remotely? >> there is none public comment is closed. is there rebuttal on behalf of the staff? >> (clearing throat). >> once again um, this subject building has 5 violation cases

including commercial space, remain and architecture and plumbing and memorable and other violations so again, we are here for this bill respond to the appellant about their order of abatement issued three years ago and they does not pass the permit until today is still open to final especially the one relevant to um, the most resist for the last inspection u - so last inspection schedule on january 2024 are working together the inspection if you see still open so this permit has not been complete so in in any conclusion i recommend the staff recommended the commissioner uphold the order of abatement and costs. thank you.

>> rebuttal for the appellant? >> can i just let you know those were from the p t s not something that is made up just the other day. we don't object to any of the paving for this we understand the city has put in time and effort and public comment complaints those complaints don't lie. and no longer live and getting back to the sros you'll find surprised not see tons of complaints on that this is not unusual to see

that. right now as possibly i pointed out earlier we are in the process of finishing up we need time to do that and like to delay the read into the record the order of abatement and not that much we need to again, the big one about the bathroom we are not do something about it and will go back to planning and trying to get things done as quickly as possible and this is the sro we've been living there all the time and not easy to work in that being said, i will hope you give us time to close that permits that have been issued and will be finishing everything off are working together inspections and have some corrections to be made. once we're done that is it.

>> thank you. >> before the - >> oh, can comment on that later. thank you. >> commissioners discussion? >> you can ask questions of staff and appellant if you like to see. >> and before we get started he that are talking about the case as to whether or not there were permits in 2021 and i don't even reduce after they originally asked for may 2021 that's the question on the table; correct? >> speak into the mic. >> i know one question but really a was sought more time but the question i have is

specifically how much time will you need so that's another part of the discussion that i'd like to engage in. >> commissioner alexander-tut. >> so i have two questions one for the department and one for the appellant. can you help me understand the difference continue cases three and 4? sorry 6 did 21 and 22 you said they were the same too different violations under different codes or correction that needed to be made can i help me said those

two cases? >> case no. 6921 is about building visions and success is different inspectors and for the same physical 6 like 16 hear both or two different tiers. >> welcome the building code violations by the building inspector different building permits you that helps methinks they look to similar. >> if you sit back here with an electrical violation and too building violations one for the residential hotel and one for the commercial section two separate violations one for the residential and one for the commercial space. >> and do these always have to

be separate notice of violations like plumbing and typical and you this code violations? >> well, it will be separate they're separate inspectors and different codes like the violations one plumbing inspector violations. >> so the inspectors at that time throughout that was serious enough for violations. >> that concludes my that question on that for the appellant any of the work completed are working together the one hundred and 80 days in 2021 or even in 6 months? >> can you repeat that, please. >> surely to the original appeal was on may 2021 um, was any of the work completed within one hundred and 80 days or even within 6 probation officers of

may 2021 date? >> let's see - from 2021 (laughter) i - i don't building it would have been no complete i think that involved i'm not sure what is there i know that where we are right now and want to bring up once planning code got involved. >> we were told to stoop work by planning. so and on and on and on. >> that's a direct result of working without proper permits. >> are working together the alterations made without proper permitting. >> for the appellant.

>> you're prior statement i heard deregulation you said you're fine with the assessment costs? >> yes. >> so why my understanding you're admitting for the issuance of notice of violations were correct so, so narrow this done is you're this appeal and the request a request for modification of the order for a delay of the recording of the basement? >> that's correct again we're the assessment of cost we understand you have to pay for a that not free and get time to get everything closed out and whatever the initial costs anyway, i have no argument are working together that. >> okay. >> um, how much time? >> i asked one hundred and 80

days but i think that is 60 days will be enough. >> remember the only thing could be a bit of a hold up on planning going back are working together the drawings and taking the bathroom and today there they're requiring to go to dbi so before you get a permit at the counter so that was before they sign the plan check would be three months that's why i asked for one hundred and 80 days. >> final question. the base for the request for the delay and this recording you're going to sounds like you're going to do the correct actions otherwise a business reason or some other reason why you need the delay?

>> yeah. >> so from a modification to be considered another factors at least that's my finding any other factors you want to state now would persuade us to provide the delay in theing. >> removal one bathroom and remembered we want to make things better for the tenants and put in a bathroom that being said, we had had incarcerating wanted to come back. >> that's how that showed and it's are working together the sros i work are working together them quite a bit and is an issue of one working in sros. thank

you. >> thank you. any other commissioners? >> question. >> as far as i don't see anything in here that evidenceds to me that any of the sros were recorded in error to move forward with the work prior without the permits i'm inclined to uphold and record. >> okay. and so. >> yes. >> i wanted to say there are 5 [off mic.] will be moved for (unintelligible). >> can you say the numbers or

have to have motion by - >> (laughter.) >> okay. >> through the chair. if i may they have to be separate or name them in one motion? >> already done. >> (multiple voices). >> [off mic.] >> separate. >> okay. and there is any um, changes to the way, you know, we um, you know, theirs 5 of us. >> you go down the line? >> yeah. >> motion to uphold case no.

case no. 6919. >> second. >> there was motion and second president chavez. >> so the possession is to uphold the order of abatement and assessment of the cause are working together replace to case no. appeal number case no. 6919. >> okay. >> yeah. >> do i have motion and second and the roll call vote on the motion president chavez, yes. >> vice president neumann impresses, yes. commissioner alexander-tut, yes. >> commissioner shaddix, yes. >> commissioner wilson, yes. >> the motion carries unanimously.. >> next motion to uphold for

case case no. 6920 assessment and order of abatement. >> second. >> there is motion and a second for the omicron and assessment of the costs forever appeal of that number case no. 6920. >> and the roll call vote president chavez, yes. >> vice president neumann, yes. >> commissioner alexander-tut, yes. >> commissioner shaddix, yes. >> commissioner wilson, yes. >> the motion carries unanimously. >> the next one case no. 6921. >> oh, um, my turn (laughter) motion to uphold the order of abatement and the assessment of the costs for case no. case no.

6921. >> do i have a second? >> second. >> and so there's a motion and second and a roll call president chavez, yes. >> vice president neumann, yes. >> commissioner alexander-tut, yes. >> commissioner shaddix, yes. and commissioner wilson, yes. motion carries unanimously and next - >> i'd like to planning commission make a motion order of abatement and assessment for costs number success is that right. >> case no. 6922 and motion do i have a second? motion and second. and roll call vote. >> president chavez, yes. >> vice president neumann, yes. >> commissioner alexander-tut, yes. >> commissioner shaddix, yes. >> commissioner wilson, yes. >> motion carries unanimously.

>> and the last case. >> i move to uphold the order of abatement and assessment of the costs for case no. 6923. >> okay. >> do i have a second? ? and second. >> there's a motion and second for case no. 6923 roll call vote president chavez, yes. >> vice president neumann, yes. >> commissioner alexander-tut, yes. >> commissioner shaddix, yes. >> commissioner wilson, yes. >> motion carries unanimously. thank you. >>. okay. we're on to um, temperatures. >> and. >> f. general public comment: members of the public may address the board on matters that are within the board's jurisdiction and are not on today's agenda. speakers shall address their remarks to the board as a whole and not to individual board members or department personnel.

>> okay. >> um, seeing none, no general public comment next adjournment motion to journey adjourn all commissioners in favor we're adjourned it is 10:35 a.m. the simmons abatement appeals board/building inspection and take a brief recess and convene at the building inspection. >>