Here. Contribution commissioner mccarthy . Here. Commissioner walker . Here. Commissioner konstin is excused. Next item, b, is the oath. Will all parties giving testimony today please stand and raise your right hand. Do you swear the testimony youre about to give is the truth to the best of your knowledge . Yes. Thank you. You may be seated. I wanted to state for everyones information that the department will present its case first and the appellant, each side has seven minutes to present their case. Next theres Public Comment and members have three minutes each to speak. And then lastly theres rebuttal time of three minutes for the department and then the appellant. Our next item is actually i wanted to make a brief announcement that case number 6861 has requested a continuance, so that case will be continued for 30 days. Is there anyone here to speak or Public Comment . Okay. Seeing none, our next item is item c, approval of minutes. Discussion and possible action to adopt the minutes for meeting held on april 17th, 2019. Okay. Are there any corrections or comments regarding the minutes, as presented . I move. I accept the minutes. Second. Okay. Moved and seconded. Thank you. Theres a motion and a second to approve the minutes. Is there any Public Comment . Seeing none, all commissioners in favor . Aye. Any opposed . The minutes are approved. Next item is case number 6862, 2945 becky, nancy and stanley. Action requested by appellant to obtain a 90day extension to do the work. Would staff like to come forward . Good morning. My name is mauricio hernandez, chief building inspector for Code Enforcement process. So the summary is work without permit, over excavation and removal of a retaining wall, at the rear lot and hazardous condition. A notice of violation was issued back in august of 2018. Number regards to the excavation that was observed. Two building permits, one for shoring and the other one for remediation to comply with a notice, repair the retaining wall. And also provide [inaudible] in regards to the damage done to the foundation. As you can see on the back, theres some picturing showing the damage. This is the foundation of the existing adjacent property. The retaining wall is the one on the already removed and thats the exposed soil conditions of the adjacent property. Staff issued order of abatement. And 3 20 2019 the owner was given enough time, he was also given an extension of the hearing, in order to correct this. Theres only two permits filed to correct the conditions. One for the retaining wall. And then the other is to comply with notice of violation prior to shoring and all of the repairs done to the foundation. The staff recommendation is to uphold the order of abatement and impose [indiscernible] commissioner clinch . Can i ask a question . Are you done yet . Do you know the condition today, since its been about a year. I believe its still the same. We havent gotten any progress. I was reviewing the file and we havent had any action from the owner, since we issued the order of abatement. Okay. Has the neighboring property weighed in on this at all . Yeah. We actually issued a notice of violation for the neighboring property. But we have that on hold, because theyre not at fault here. So we are working we are actually trying if you look at the whole chronology of the actions, we are trying to work with them, because we know that theres a civil matter to all this. A civil dispute in all of this. Theres two properties involved. But at the same time we still need those permits to be issued, we need the shoring, we need the assessment report. And by looking at the file, the assessment report was never given to our inspector. I see. Thank you. Is there cooperation from the other neighbor . And these are the pending issues that they actually have to sign a waiver to allow them to perform the work. Has that waiver been issued . I apologize. I dont have an answer for that, because i know at one point we had a meeting with the owner. And, you know, again there was more of a civil dispute saying we didnt cause the damage, so why are we needing to be doing the work. Yeah. Well, i dont think thats the question is obviously its very clear who has to do the mitigation work. But it needs the cooperation of the person that is affected by it. So the question is is there a situation where the neighbor is not given the legal autonomy, to go ahead and get the work done . Assuming they are. Like i said, we had a hearing for the other property. Yes. Around the same time as this one. We did send it back to staff, because they were yes. But there is cooperation. Is there the signed letter, which is what the Department Needs to process a set of drawings from that neighbor . Maybe mr. Sweeny can tell me the exact name of that form thats needed. Well, its a building permit. But theres a letter stating that your Structural Engineer has power. Theyve filed two permits, both should have been over the counterrer. Theyve been sitting there now for 11 months. Why are they not processed . They havent come in to do it. Its a simple overthecounter permit. They filed two permits. Why have the permits not been issued . Theyre here. You can ask them. If to file the permit, you have to have a letter from the neighbor. Or we wouldnt have accepted it. So what were trying to establish here, if this is procedurally not the procedural problem, because both parties are not cooperating. Just trying to establish this. Its suppose to happen immediately, not within a year. Thats very Important Information here. We need to know who is holding it up. There is two permits. Both the permit for the adjoining neighbor wouldnt have been accepted, but it was. Because its on filed status. But this is sandy conditions, out in the sunset. So is the delay because the permit applicant has not come in to pick them up . According to what i saw on the board, these are just form 8s. Theyre overthecounter. If they would like to. What they did, they went in and they filed it. Often times we see that as a way of delaying enforcement action. I see. One more time if you look at the screen, there was actually a note provided to them on the permit. If you look at the note on 8 29 18. Temporary fix is not efficiently compensated for the loss of support under foundation. So one thing they never provided more information on the permit itself. So i dont think its something that the other owner is actually stopping the job or the permit itself. The nextdoor neighbor is not here, right . No. And the actual notice of violation was actually two things. Obtain the service of a structure engineer to assess the situation and how to proceed in a safe manner. That was one of the items that we asked for. [bell ringing] the second was obtain a permit with plans to cover this work done as intended. Okay. Any other . Im still trying to ask the staff, do we have the letter allowing the neighbor to work . I mean, i know we were given other reasons, incomplete set of drawings. I just want to know. Is the cooperation and letter approved the neighbor to do the underpinning work on . The permit thats being shown up there was accepted. We would not have accepted it without a letter from the neighbor giving permission for the engineer to file it. Okay. So, yes, it has to be there somewhere. We dont have it here with us. Okay. Thats okay. Thats important. Thank you. So were were thinking this as incomplete set of drawings right now at this point, based on the information thats on the application . They went before tom lee. Tom lee asked for more information. They never came back. Okay. Thats important. Thank you. The appellant can come forward. Use the mic, please. Okay. I want to show you what we were trying to do. We were trying to clean up a planter box. So im going to put a picture of it right here. This is the planter box that we were trying to clean up. We just hired a handyman and he just used a shovel, bucket and the back of his truck. He had no intention of breaking this wall. The wall fell down on its own, after he excavated it. Now were trying to fix it. We contacted officerrertore officer tora who tried to full the first permit, because he was not successful. I guess thomas lee requested calculations and albert advised that he didnt think we needed calculations. He said we needed photos of inside the neighbors property. So ive been in conversation with the neighbor about that. And he absolutely refused to give me photos of inside his property. Hes okay with us doing the work on the outside, as long as you do the work outside, hes okay with it. I have correspondence showing that he wants all of the work done outside. Im happy to share that with you guys. Okay. Any questions . Okay. Okay. Thank you. All right. Is there any Public Comment on this item . Theres no Public Comment. The department have rebuttal . Appellant have anything additional youd like to say . Im sorry. Mauricio is coming. Thank you. So the violation that was issued provided clear protective action to the owner. If you look at the whole scope of the investigation, we did provide enough time for the owner to work with the department. Even the fact that we provided an extension of a hearing. And we refer back to staff, so they can work with us, but again we still have the unsafe condition. We still have, you know, permits on issue. We still have no, you know, corrective action done at this time. Okay. So for the record, just go over again the sequencing of dates. I mean, i know its in the packet. Yeah. The first action, extensions and the like. Okay. The case was opened last year, in august of 2018. Note was issued. The same day the next day that we were out there. We gave them 30 days to comply. On december 11th, we referred to Code Enforcement. January 15th we prepped for the directive hearing and on the 23rd of january, it was a continuance was requested. To march 5th, 2019. So we we consider that continuance and we worked with them and provided a continuance of the hearing. After that, you know, the case was prepped for the hearing again. Thats when we provided the order of abatement, because we have no again we have no issued permit and we still have no shoring. I mean, if we had a structure engineers report, then we can work with them and say, okay, look, yeah. We can work with you. At this time on the file we never the owner never provided that first item, which was that report. Okay. Thank you. Any rebuttals . This is the photo that shows i met up with a Structural Engineer. Albert was going to provide a free consultation that date to me. But he said you need to do emergency shoring right now. So we got a contractor out to do the work. And then this is the emergency shoring that he did and submitted to the city for approval. And then i followed up later on, per the city, with another inspector to get permission to do the shoring work. So i sent a letter to the neighbor, will you give me permission to do this work. And i guess at that time, a week later, he went to the city and said does he need to sign my letter. And he was told he did not need to sign my letter, because all of the work is suppose to happen on my side. And, you know, so he didnt sign my letter to get permission. I think the inspector was joe mcduffy and he called me and told me so directly. So, therefore, we didnt get any permission from the neighbor on the emergency shoring work. But i know that hes happy that its done. So his property is secure. So were working to install a new retaining wall. This is this was 2 feet and 20 feet long. Were planning to install a new Structural Engineer, 5 feet tall retaining wall in place in the back. So thats what were working on trying to get approval on. So thats it. Thank you. Commissioner clinch . So a question for you. So the picture you showed, how long ago was that . This was done august 28th, on the day i met up with albert, for my free consultation. He called a contractor he knew that curry construction to come over to do the work immediately. So we did this correction pretty much a few days after the notice. And the intent you have is to tear that out and put in a proper retaining wall, is what you want to do . Right. We need time for him to draw it out. And yeah to do a proper wall later. So to buy us time to do that. So that was the purpose of this wall. Its a temporary wall. Okay. Commissioner walker. What have you been doing for the last year . Thats my understanding. I mean, you seem to buy time with that. Were not trying to buy more time. Were not able to get a permit from the department of inspection to do the work. Were not trying to buy more time. Im ready to do the work. Weve been trying. Were not trying to buy more time. Right, i understand that. Why arent you down at the department with the engineering report. Weve been told we need to talk to the neighbor, get their permission. They have not given the permission. Circular here. One moment. The way the way it happens is their engineer would come down and dispute that pictures are needed from inside of the house. That all of the work can be done from outside of the house. From what ive seen from the pictures, they probably grouted the sand. And then they added more grout to fill in the portion that was missing. In the temporary . So really the work underneath that house is probably already done. So why their engineer isnt coming down and showing documents of what occurred, i have no way of telling you. Yeah. If you get hung up by one of our engineers, you can go to a supervisor. Have you been down with the Structural Engineer to the department . Yeah. Are you the engineer . No. Have you been down to the department with the Structural Engineer or a report, as requested by our department . We have not been down here with our engineer. Theyve been coming directly themselves on their own. So, no, we have not come here. But they have come down . They have come down. Michael has been he said hes been talking directly with an inspector on his drawings, to make sure that it gets approved. We dont know where it is at this moment. I know that he filed for a permit and he hopes to get the permit in 30 days. Commissioner mccarthy. You have to help me out here, im getting two different versions of the story here. One is im getting theres calculation. Im being told there suspect calculations. Now im being told the permit has not been processed because you need to get inside the property to photograph the interior of the other owner, who weve been told is cooperating. But now were hearing isnt cooperating. So, i mean, this is i mean, im sympathetic to these people, because i see what happens with these. But weve got a real problem here. This is a project thats been undermined for a year. Well, its not. Theyve done the work without a building permit. According to the pictures they just showed. They went ahead and did the work without the permit. Theres been nothing pulled from it. Weve asked im coming from the point of view that that doesnt exist because we had no permit i have no idea the integrity of that shoring job that was done. So this is the problem the the problem here. Were trying to get to who is stalling this. Im getting two different versions here. Thats all im saying, you know. Because i as somebody who has had these situations before in the building world, if you have a neighbor who is not cooperating, it really becomes a situation where if youre doing everything on your side, and theyre not doing it, we have this standoff. And we need to this is going to help me in making my decision here. Im trying to get to the bottom of this. It would appear that the neighbor is cooperating, but with the caveat that i dont want i dont want people in my house making a mess. I dont think you have to do the work on the other side. I think all of the work can be done from their side of the property. Okay. Were assuming. Can you explain to me what the neighbors exact objection is as to why they wont let you into the house, so you can complete your permit, that youre telling us that theyre cooperating for you to get. We know theyre not cooperating with giving access to inside their house. They didnt say why. They wont give access to their house. But weve been asking, you know. We said it would probably clear but they wont provide it. Just simple pictures of a wall or a doorway would be helpful. But they havent provided anything to us. Weve had emails, you know, talking to them, asking them to sign a release of the piece of paper that you guys from the department of building inspection. They dont want to sign the piece of paper. We made an offer to them. But they said no way. So thats we gave them the deadline to july 5th. But theres emails here indicating they dont want nothing to do with us. Its your testimony that the permit that youre trying to pull and your engineer is trying to pull has all of the information it needs to be issued, except youve been denied the permit hang on one second, inspector. You were denied the permit because the neighbor is not cooperating. Right. Right. Okay. Well, thats thats where were at. Please. Okay. Inspector. Well, we can all we have is tom lee, who is retired now, he did 30 years with us. And 8 29 18 he says overthecounter review, but not approved. Temporary fix is shown on plans is not efficiently compensate for the loss of support under existing foundation, due to overexcavation. Comments noted on plans in exchange directly to e. O. R. At counter. Engineer of record at counter. Yeah. The engineer was talking to them, almost a year ago. Yeah. Hasnt come back. And im not im not coming from the point of view it was done correctly anyhow, right. So i think we need to go fast forward now. You have a neighbor thats not cooperating. Thats the question that was asked at the very start of this hearing. And you an n. O. V. On that neigh. You should be forcing that n. O. V. Based on the testimony were hearing exactly. Weve said that in the past. Through the chair, and whats in front of us here is the n. O. V. Of a neighbor, is that you have on hold. So what the testimony here today from your side is doesnt make sense. Isnt adding up here. But the reason not too long ago, our policy was give notice of violations to both parties and take it all the way through the process. Weve been criticized by this commission often by why were attacking, why we go after the person that didnt do the work. So weve changed up. So now we give both sides a notice of violation. But we but we only go on the enforcement on the people that caused the problem. If i can make a comment, we pushed the other case to the directors hearing. The hearing officer actually was the one that referred back to staff. It wasnt the staff that send it back. Second, the owners were actually willing to work with the other owners. But again thats more of a civil dispute, that if something happens in between them, i have no control over. But they were because they were actually able to file the application. The other item that we have issues with is the owner, even if they had an engineers report, never reached out to the inspector, saying we have the engineers involved now in the process. So that we can submit a report, so they can submit a report. And we can say, okay, look, give me a sketch, a stamp, a sketch with the engineer. We can approve that shoring for now. But nothing of that happened. Nothing of that nature happened. So we did actually enforce the other notice of violation. We went up to the directors hearing and it was a hearing officer that made the ruling and that decision, sending it back to staff. So whats in front of us here today is the temporary sorry, through the chair, is a temporary permit to protect the property, not the actual undermine not the underpinning permit. So there was two permits that they were suppose to get. One was the shoring and one was actually the remediation of the work. Okay. Whats in front of us is the shoring permit, right . Yeah. And that, like i said that could be issued . Yeah. And the bill was flexible enough that if we had an engineers report saying, yeah, this is imminent hazard right now, heres my corrective action. I need to do this work within three days. Honestly as a chief or a senior could say, yeah, sure. Show me an engineers report, show me the stamp and well work with you and you can provide some emergency measures right now. And then we can move forward with the retroactive permit. But didnt happen on this one. And we have given enough time. And as well, like i said, weve issued the other owner notices of violation. We send it to the directors hearing and it was per the hearing officer that was referred back to staff. Okay. Commissioner walker. Thank you. This you know, it helps us see through the different layers of this. Firsttime recalling past hearings where we actually had all parties come together at this hearing, which seemed like a good thing. I mean, i think that the discussion, as i recall it, was yes, were inconveniencing people around. But there needs to be some sort of forced negotiation. And its not going to happen necessarily, whats holding it up is an engineering drawing that includes an interior assessment of the neighbor. If you need to see that, its not being forced. So i would say that theres no reason not to uphold the violation. But im i get that there needs to be more time involved. Its just i have the concern that president mccarthy does, that weve been sort of allowing this to sort of linger for so long and arent really aware of whats going on under that foundation. So i think that we need to do something really quickly. And maybe its splitting the cases here and dealing with the shoring, as an emergency as a temporary thing. And, i mean, either way this has been going on way too long. And i dont know yet why that is the case. So i still need to sort of discuss or hear from the other commissioners about that. Because i dont know how that affects our access. Commissioner walker, perfect. Okay. Any other comments, commissioners . Okay. Thank you. Okay. Please just return to your seats. Okay. So we have a situation where, you know, we have a danger a potentially dangerous situation. Its gone on way too long. It does sound like there is reason to uphold the order of abatement. And we can enforce the fines. But getting to the point of separating this, so that we actually get a solution, that first and foremost, the temporary shoring or the emergency shoring be done under permit and with inspections is the first priority. We have to know that that was any work that was done there was done correctly. You know, clearly its a bit out of character that, before a permit was issued to do it, the work was done. So i would think that im sorry. Commissioner walker. Maybe we should take Public Comment and finish we did. We did already. I think that i think i would tend to want to uphold the order of abatement assessed costs and just, based on the findings of the actual violations, and the necessity to move forward around this emergency situation of the foundation. I think that staff usually goes forward finding a solution that satisfies the permits, as that plays out. Thats my feeling of how it goes. Correct. So it would allow the first part to happen and then hopefully the engineer would be engaged for the subsequent fixes of this. So i dont know that we need to hold an for this to happen, but we could. Maybe we can get a weighin from staff on that. Do you have any perspective on it . This work could be done, you could rebuild the foundation with that footing probably in a couple of weeks. Easily. Its not a big job. Yep. Through the chair, i think what commissioner walker and what the commissioners are thinking, we break this up into two parts. One is the temporary shoring of the property, to issue a permit immediately, where i would envision they would send their contractor or their engineer down, lets say tomorrow. Issue that permit because what you need for that is done. Possibly. Yeah. Okay. Tom lee, who wasnt happy with how they did it yeah. Have the engineer go down there and correct whatever needs to be done there. And then that would then we can send somebody out to see if the work that theyve already done does meet that criteria under that permit, right. We can do that. Then we as a commission know its stable. Then i think somebody needs to sit down with the homeowner to know we now need a detailed set of underpinnings drawings, to include the cooperation of the neighbor next door in full. Well, the emerging shoring permit probably is the same. Is it . And then the second permit is to put back the retaining wall that was moved. Right. Right. That permit would have the cooperation of the nextdoor neighbor, and get past this situation were dealing with. Commissioner walker. So i think that the question here is does the first part of reviewing the emergency shoring, does that require the neighbor cooperation or can we do that with just the engineer . Well, we already have we have a permit thats in play. So you just need to inspect it . I need an engineer to come down and sit down with our engineer and bring and bring calculations. And calculations i dont think they need to go next door. Okay. Yeah. So then first step. Yep. Okay. If their engineer wants to come down and meet me, i can bring him downstairs. But i need their engineer to come. Commissioner. If i may, through the chair. Sure, go ahead. Your engineer. I need your engineer to come down tomorrow and see me. Okay. What time . Im there at 7 30. Okay. Okay. Thank you, deputy sweeney. Okay. So i would move to uphold the order of abatement. Correct. Assess costs. Correct. Facts presented showing evidence of violation of our codes, sufficient to uphold this order. And work for a speedy resolution as discussed here. Correct. Perfect. Id second that. I have a motion and a second. Well do a roll call vote. President warshell . Yes. Vice president lee . Yes. Commissioner clinch . Yes. Commissioner mccarthy . Yes. Commissioner moss . Yes. Commissioner walker . Yes. General Public Comment, are there any members of the public here to speak for general Public Comment for items on the abatement appeal board agenda . Okay. Seeing none, item f, adjournment. Move to adjourn. Second. Motion and second. Okay. We are now adjourned. We will reconvene at 10 00 a. M. , the building inspection commission. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. A way of life in San Francisco. When the next major quake hits, the city hopes a new law requiring seismic upgrades to five story buildings will help keep more residents safe and sound. Tell me a little about the soft Story Program. What is it . Its a program the mayor signed into law about a year and a half ago and the whole idea behind it was to help homeowners strengthen buildings so that they would not collapse. Did you the soft Story Program apply to all buildings or building that were built in a certain time frame . It only applies to buildings built in the time frame of 1978 and earlier. Its aimed at wood framed buildings that are three or more stories and five or more units. But the openings at the garage level and the street level arent supported in many buildings. And without the support during a major earthquake, they are expected to pancake and flatten ~. Many of the buildings in this program are under rent control so its to everybodys advantage to do the work and make sure they protect their investment and their tenant. Notices have gone out to more than 6,000 owners of potentially atrisk properties but fewer than onethird have responded and thousands might miss an important deadline in september to tell the city what they plan to do. Lets talk worst case scenario. What happens in a collapse . Buildings have the tendency of rolling over. The first soft story walls lean over and the building collapse. In an earthquake the building is a total loss. Can you describe what kind of strengthening is involved in the retrofit . One of the basic concepts, you want to think of this building kind of like rubber band and the upper three floor are very rigid box and the garage is a very flexible element. In an earthquake the garage will have a tendency to rollover. You have to rubber band analogy that the first floor is a very tough but flexible rubber band such that you never drive force he to the upper floors. Where all your damage goes into controlled element like plywood or steel frame. So, here we are actually inside of a soft story building. Can we talk a little about what kinds of repairs Property Owners might expect . Its a very simple process. We deliberately tried to keep it that way. So, whats involved is plywood, which when you install it and make a wall as we have done here already, then you cover it with this gypsum material. This adds some flexibility so that during the earthquake youll get movement but not collapse. And that gets strengthened even more when we go over to the steel frame to support the upper floor. So, potentially the wood and the steel it sounds like a fairly straightforward process takes your odds of collapse from one in 4 to one in 30 . Thats exactly right. Thats why were hoping that people will move quickly and make this happen. Great. Lets take a look. So, lets talk steel frames. Tell me what we have going on here. Well, we have a steel frame here. There are two of these and they go up to the lower floor and there is a beam that go across, basically a box that is much stiffer and stronger. ~ goes so that during the earthquake the upper floor will not collapse down on this story. It can be done in about two weeks time. Voila, youre done. Easy. For more information on how to get your building earthquake ready, roll call . We have a rum have a quorum. Good morning. Madam secretary, i will keep my comments brief. Congratulations to director huey who participated in the City Administrators Office on school reisraelience in september. Insuring seismic safety to our schools and remains a top priority for the city. The big one ed donnelly who manages the Response Unit and Senior Engineer and the plan review supervisor participated in the recent Conference Call with portland, oregon, building officials to Exchange Best Practices on the respective citys Emergency Response and preparations. He is eager to accept taken by San Francisco such as the seismic retrofits of the apartments, safety assessments to provide damage assessments and reoccupancy timelines and effective Emergency Response plan with key personnel prepared to act. With earthquakes near bakers field they need to get ready for the next one. That is top priority for all cities and residents. Keep focused on that. Big thank you to joe duffy and kevin who received letter from appreciation from a customer. The customer said we are thankful your staff are around makings sure we are surrounded by safe buildings. Congratulations. Congratulations to director huey for his past participation in the Panel Discussion which he briefed members on the safety programs including mandatory seismic retrofits of apartment buildings, private schools and structure evaluation and implementation of seismic safety recommendation and storefronts. Congratulations to Deputy Director and Senior Engineer who participate tomorrow afternoon, july 18th in the meeting with supervisor peskin and the members about specific tier four mandatory seismic retrofit projects. They will update on the status of this retrofit and respond to questions. Also to director hughie making remarks at the Chinese Real Estate Association expo on july 27th. There will be an update on important safety programs. Finally, the International Code council, icc, are hosting on july 25 a seismic roundtable in the State Capitol to discuss the issues in developing a national appliable approach to seismic functional recovery for new construction. D. B. I. Staff will be participating to improve communications, share ideas and facilities, collaboration among local, state and federal agencies for seismic Safety Standards and practices. That concludes my announcements. Is there any Public Comment on the president s announcements . Seeing none, our next item is item 3 general Public Comment. The bic will take Public Comment on matters not part of this agenda. I am kevin chang. I would like to talk about 18th street. In the review conducted by building staff. Planning commission on may 9th requested a history review. Building and planning inspected the site inspection on june 13th. In addition to 13 previously identified Code Violations. They identified 11 more issues. Serial permitting. Expansion of building, conversion of Storage Space without permits. Building staff scheduled to present the findings to Planning Commission tomorrow on july 18th. However some issues. Unpermited activity done in plain sight without any enforcement action taken. No less than 17 on site inspections and despite complaints by the public in 2016 to 2018, building inspectors took no action and determined no violations existed. Complaineds concerning the permitting, some of the same Code Violations recently determined. Not until after the Planning Commission requested the permit review did the building staff issue is notice of violation in may 2019. Building inspectors issued one nov and identified in 2016 some walls which were fences built without permit but did not identify the majority every training walls were unpermitted. 822 cubic yards of the original building was excavated without permits. It is like noticing the trees but missing the forest. Trees were cut illegally but not noticing the entire forest was being raped. Permit history review needs to be thorough and transparent. Building inspection and Code Enforcement uptodate has not been. How could this happen . What should be done . That is what the building inspection needs to investigate and must hold Senior Management to act. Thank you. Good morning. Here are some sheets for each of you. It is about the bic Planning Commission joint hearing from april 2018. It is three hours and 13 minutes. I picked out people. I didnt just do the public. It is very interesting. The comparison with the one you just had in june is stark. There is one thing that stood out besides the comments i highlighted on the sheet for you. You were going to get together with the Planning Commission sometime before the end of the summer of 2018 and do something, you know, have a blue ribbon panel. I dont know what happened to that. I know the legislation came from the board. That was a good idea. I think there were a lot of good ideas at the hearing especially marrmare mary gallagher. I wish she were still here. With overhead, please. I was involved in a dr in an action at the board of appeals for a project across the street from me. There was an excavation to put a unit below the garage. I was concerned about that and concerned about the preservation of the facade which is a mediterranean battle front, it is very nice. That is going away. What happened with the second unit that was very pleasing to the Planning Commission and staff. It was three bedroom unit and after the dr, they didnt deal with the facade issue or the excavation of the unit. I thought to unit should go in the garage. It is made for that. With the revision they did reduce this back for the neighbor down the hill. Your knowledge staff said two building staff said they didnt have proper egress. I dont think they met the standards. My point is not to point fingers but to say it would have been nice if that could have been discovered at the beginning and the Planning Commission and staff and the neighbors could have had more information. What happened just to finish the story. We did go to the board of appeals. They didnt do anything about the facade. When the commissioner saw it he said you have got to have a second bedroom that is happening now. Nothing has happened yet. It is sitting there. You know, i dont know how they are going to do the second bedroom and have a decent living room. It is kind of a mess. I hope it works out. I just think it shows that somehow building and planning need to Work Together at the beginning. If you have some issues, the Building Code has issues that dont mesh with the planning code or planning departments policy to try to dense fi, then something has to happen. I dont think this unit will be on the market. It is not very desirable. Thank you very much. There are no additional Public Comments, we will go to item 4. Action to swear in a member of the coadvisory committee. They recommend gina for the street to expire in 2022. We met and there was an opportunity to bring a new member into the Code Advisory Committee, and, fortunately, a very well qualified experienced person stepped up t up to take e seat. It is gina sin tony. She lived here 30 years as a bay area native, runs her own contracting company. I have known gina many years. Her intelligence and hard work and her commitment to this profession are exemplary. In doing home remodeling, these projects sometimes get very hairy, and people are not always happy, however, when you talk to clients of gina they are amazed by the strong outcomes. She is noted for always doing it right as the first standard that is throughout the project. It is with absolute pleasure that i welcome her to Code Advisory Committee. As my wife pointed out, it is about time we had more women serving, and we are delighted to have such a qualified one finding the time to do this and serve her city. I would like to swear her in now. We have to do the motion first. All right. I would like to move we have gina sin tony on the code advisory. We have the motion and seco second. Roll call vote. roll call . Now would you like to come forward. I do swear to support and defend the constitution of the United States and the constitution of the state of california against all enemies, foreign and domestic. That i will bear true faith and allegiance to the constitution of the United States and the constitution of the state of california, that i take this obligation freely without any mental reservations or purpose of evasion. And that i will well and faithfully discharge the duties upon which i am about to enter and during such time as i hold the office as a member of the Code Advisory Committee, general contractor seat of the state and county of San Francisco. Okay. We are all set. If you would like to make comments, you are welcome to. It is a thrill to be here. I am anxious to contribute. I live this code every day. I am in the field. I dont dress like this often. It is a pleasure to form what happens going forward. Thank you. [applause. ] next item is 5. Discussion and possible action to make recommendations regarding current membership and reappointments to the Code Advisory Committee. Terms to expire august 10, 2022. Our other members of the Code Advisory Committee have decided to stay on. We want to first and foremost thank them for their service and their willingness to continue with their service. I therefore move that all the other nominations be approved. Second. Motion and second. I will do the roll call vote. roll call . Would it be appropriate to read the names and seats for the record. Just a minute. Hold on. Steven harris, chair, Small Projects civil engineer. J edgar finney, junior, major project architect. Sony sanchez, general business community, Disability Access advocate arnie is disability. I am sorry. Commercial Property Owner henry. Robert wong. Mechanical engineering contractor. For robert wong. Renney project Structural Engineer. Bryan sellers for Fire Protection engineer. John libby. Okay. Major project contractor nancy goldenberg. Mark cunningham for Historical Preservation architect. Members atlarge. Eileen dick, jonathan rodriguez, Residential Projects contractor. Zachary nathan for small project