Ill try to. Joe duffy, dbi. The permit under appeal is a commencement of work not started under a previously permit, soft story retrofit under 34b engineering criteria including plywood walls, simpson walls. This is a renewal permit. So back in 2016 went through a process took them about a week to get the permit. And it was maybe 1,000 valued for the soft story retrofit. They got the permit and didnt start the work. The permit got approved until the contractor was chosen until the building got sold. And then the permit could have been issued in which case the plot wasnt but the permit gets issued, 360 days to complete the work. I dont know what happened in between that time. But then when they came back in 2019 as you heard the option is a renewal permit which is appealable which is why we have an appeal. The extensions on the permits, this permit would have extended for a number of years. We just dont they have to write a letter to say why they start the work. So that didnt happen. Th
Normally storage does not require windows of this kind. Storage does not require doors going downstairs into the garden and coming in from the breezeway i think this is somewhat unusual and i would like to ask staff as to whether or not that was discussed, considered, or was the applicant asked on what the Storage Space already entails. The option would be to not have this wall dividing the storage area. You could have a three car tandem garage, although that is not very feasible for moving cars around. And a. D. U. Would trigger new requirements under the Building Code, which might make this project unfeasible for the applicants. There is a narrow lot. They would have additional egress requirements. When this project started, i believe in a. D. U. Was not possible until you would need at least three years to add it, so at the time it could have been added with thought for the future, but i believe the staff and the project architects can speak more directly on the requirements under t
Was 616 carolina street had not been twooieded. So no building in particular according to San Francisco has the 616 as the actual address. So the law firm felt that was appropriate to use this numbering when we went through the condominium process. Mr. Apalos purchased the front house in 2018, signed the t. H. C. Agreement. We assumed all along that this would be the street driveways numbering, but a couple of months ago when mr. Apalos went to the d. B. I. , we were informed that because you cannot have a new street address for a new building you cant have a new address for an existing building that the 616 would go to the front building. My feeling was that was a misinterpretation of the guidelines from the d. B. I. It says exactly that, you cannot reassign a new address to an existing building, but we were subdividing the property which had an address, but none of the individual buildings had an address. This has been my property for almost 30 years. This is where i vote, its my pas
Of ownership or any other change in the building . Nothing on that. These permits are reviewed by department of building inspection, not Planning Department. Okay, great. Thank you. Thank you. Well now hear from dbi. Enlighten us joe ill try to. Joe duffy, dbi. The permit under appeal is a commencement of work not started under a previously permit, soft story retrofit under 34b engineering criteria including plywood walls, simpson walls. This is a renewal permit. So back in 2016 went through a process took them about a week to get the permit. And it was maybe 1,000 valued for the soft story retrofit. They got the permit and didnt start the work. The permit got approved until the contractor was chosen until the building got sold. And then the permit could have been issued in which case the plot wasnt but the permit gets issued, 360 days to complete the work. I dont know what happened in between that time. But then when they came back in 2019 as you heard the option is a renewal permit w
On the whole, i am supportive of this project, and i will turn it over to the director. Thank you, commissioner. I will emphasize this is 25 affordable. It is a pretty su substantial number of affordable. To commissioner johnsons point, it is common in much of the city to have taller buildings at the corners especially in the commercial districts. It is common in the richmond and Pacific Heights with the multiple story buildings with lower rise Single Family or two family between, and because this is on a major transit line, as many of you pointed out, this felt like the right place for this amount of density. With respect to the transition. This is a very narrow lot. It would be extremely difficult, i think, to carve out some parts of this building without losing more units and getting into that whole discussion about the loss of units with respect to other aspects of city law and policy. I think on the whole weared on the side of saying this was the right project in the right place a