Department of Building Inspection

BUILDING INSPECTION COMMISSION (BIC)
Department of Building Inspection (DBI)

REGULAR MEETING
Monday, July 18, 2005 at 9:00 a.m.
City Hall, 1 Dr. Carlton B. Goodlett Place, Room 400
Aired Live on SFGTV Channel 26

Adopted December 5, 2005

Secretary Aherne announced that there were two corrections to the agenda.   In item #6 David Green’s title should be Senior Electrical Inspector and the address on 19^th Avenue should be 2508.

2.  President’s Announcements.
     a.  Update on 4109 Irving Street.
     b.   Update on James Li’s projects.

President Hirsch reported that these items have been on the calendar for months and said that he had gotten a report from Ex-Commissioner Pat Buscovich who visited the property at 4109 Irving Street and, as a private citizen and structural engineer, did pro bono work and reported that there is virtually nothing there.   President Hirsch said that there were no footings or walls, just a handful of studs that are full of dry rot and termite infestation.  President Hirsch stated that there is a request before the Planning Commission to try to expedite or get a demolition permit so this does not fall into an illegal demolition situation.  President Hirsch said that Engineer Li who seemed to be the focus of questioning on this project is not involved anymore and that is where it stands right now.

President Hirsch said that on the other projects, item #2b, there were some 40 projects that were evidently being questioned for the addition of a second story and questioning whether the footings were appropriate.   President Hirsch said that of these 40 only 7 were found to have, by investigation by the Building Department and then subsequently again by Ex-Commissioners Buscovich and Santos, seismic upgrade carried out by transverse walls or shear walls or frames in the lower stories.  President Hirsch stated that these are really the critical elements in a seismic retrofit when adding a second story and said that the question of the existing footings on the property line really do not enter into the seismic upgrade. President Hirsch stated that Mr. Santos had written a letter dated May 17^th to the Building Department in which he reviewed the drawings; President Hirsch said that he also reviewed the same drawings and reached essentially the same conclusions as Mr. Santos.  President Hirsch said that Mr. Santos did a quick calculation just to see both what would the bearing pressure be, bearing pressure not seismic overload, and found that even though these footings may not have met the minimum depth or width that the Building Code requires for new buildings, the bearing pressure, in other words the pressure exerted on soil even with the addition of a second, third or fourth story, did not exceed what would be allowable soil bearing pressures.  President Hirsch said that as far as seismic upgrade goes, these projects seem to have taken care of that; the project sponsor got the building permits, they were constructed and said that he thought this item could be put to rest.

Commissioner Guinnane asked what the 7 addresses were that were not in compliance with the Code.   Commissioner Guinnane stated that he had a total of 50 jobs and asked what eliminated the other 43 jobs because basically all of the jobs had the same detail.  Commissioner Guinnane said that when James Li appeared before the Commission he said that he had a standard detail that he and all of his staff was using.  Commissioner Guinnane said that it was very suspicious that when Rodrigo Santos was on the Commission he supported Commissioner Guinnane 100% on this matter and confirmed that 4109 Irving would not figure out.  Commissioner Guinnane said that there was some discussion that there was rebar in the old walls at 4109 Irving and said that he went on a site inspection with the Director Frank Chiu, Wing Lau and Hanson Tom and there was no rebar whatsoever.  Commissioner Guinnane said that he would like to bring in an expert by the name of John Hom who does work for the City to make an assessment.  President Hirsch said that there was no Code violation in the seismic work or the addition of the stories that he could find in these buildings.  President Hirsch said that the drawings indicate that items were installed to address seismic resistance of these buildings.  Commissioner Guinnane said that 4109 had no rebar.  President Hirsch said that 4109 was one category and the 7 projects were separate.  President Hirsch said that he had no idea what was at 4109 Irving, but said that right now nothing exists there.  Commissioner Guinnane said that the footing at 4109 was a regular battered wall.  President Hirsch said that it is not there now.  President Hirsch asked what the issue was.  Commissioner Guinnane said that he felt that the foundation that was there and the detail that was submitted were not adequate to support a two-story over the top of the existing building.  President Hirsch asked on what engineering basis Commission Guinnane was stating that it is incapable of supporting a second story.  Commissioner Guinnane said that he spoke to Rodrigo Santos and he was the one who supported that.  Commissioner Guinnane said that he was not an engineer and said that President Hirsch was not the engineer of record on any of these projects so unless calculations were run there was no assurance that this was satisfactory. President Hirsch said that there is nothing at 4109 Irving.  Commissioner Guinnane said that he felt that the foundation detail on these projects is inadequate and that was his position.  President Hirsch read from Mr. Santos’ letter and said that Mr. Santos stated that he checked with just a quick calculation and said that the additional load on the footing and the bearing pressure appeared to be within allowable limits; this had nothing to do with seismic resistance.  Commissioner Guinnane said that in talking about the load that was not Mr. Santos’ position when he was on the Commission and stated that he wanted to get an outside engineer to look at this.  President Hirsch asked who would hire the engineer.  Commissioner Guinnane said that he thought the City should pay for the engineer as John Hom is the engineer that the City uses in cases like this.  President Hirsch said that it was his professional opinion that the Commission or the Building Department should not spend any more time on this.  Commissioner Guinnane asked for input from the other Commissioners.

Commissioner Fillon said that he thought it was a little dangerous for Commissioners to be making these determinations as there is staff in the Department that should do these checks.   Commissioner Fillon said that this item was prevalent because people have been using the same detail a lot so it would be worth it to find out if it meets the Code.  President Hirsch stated that there is nothing in the Code that addresses this.  Commissioner Fillon said that President Hirsch admitted that the depth is not compliant with the Code and that the depth and the bearing strength are questionable on all of these existing foundations.  President Hirsch said that these were minimum depths and widths and said that he was not defending Mr. Li’s work by any means, but said that these buildings got permits, they were constructed and they address the issue of seismic resistance by having transverse walls, which is the weak front in these open front garage type structures.  Commissioner Fillon asked what the transverse walls were connecting to.  President Hirsch said that they have their own footings.  Commissioner Fillon stated that he did not see a problem with looking into this situation because a lot of these foundations were built a long time ago and with some of them if you put a stick in them sand comes out.  President Hirsch said that the problem with looking into this is that these buildings had building permits and the Commission could not ask the Building Department to review the calculations and drawings of every building that ever got a permit.

Commission Lee said that he felt that this was way beyond what the Commission was supposed to do and said that he thought that the responsibility of the safety of buildings rests upon the engineers and the architects of that building at the time those buildings were built.   Commissioner Lee said that if there is a problem out there, it rests on the home owner or the property owner.  Commissioner Fillon said that if the Commission allows this to go through and it is not Code compliant and there are accidents that result then the Commission is liable.  President Hirsch said that the Commission was not liable.  Commissioner Fillon stated that the Commission has a responsibility to make sure that the Code is being followed.  President Hirsch stated that it was the Building Department’s job to do that.  Commissioner Guinnane said that the Commission might not be liable on prior jobs, but now the Commission and the Department has information on these jobs.

Acting Director Amy Lee said that she believed that the Department’s Senior Engineer Tom Hui did an assessment on some of these properties some time ago, but said that the Department did not have the entire list of properties that Commissioner Guinnane had.    Commissioner Guinnane said that he could not figure out why there were 50 projects and James Li acknowledged that he uses a standard detail, then why did 7 fail and 43 get over the threshold.  President Hirsch said that nothing failed.  Commissioner Guinnane said that if that were the case why did the City change the policy on this particular detail.  Commissioner Guinnane said that in looking at another potentially unlawful demolition he asked DBI staff how they knew that there was rebar in the walls and if an x-ray or core sample was taken.  Commissioner Guinnane said that the engineer told him that he did not know.  Commissioner Guinnane said that it is unfair to say that the home owner is responsible because a homeowner is not going to pull down a wall to find out what is in the building.  Commissioner Lee said that it is the homeowners’ responsibility to find out what is going on with a house and said that if a purchaser does not know they should find out.  Commissioner Guinnane said that he strongly believes and wanted the record to reflect that he would call for the Commission to bring in an outside individual to look at these drawings and make a determination other than employees of the City.

President Hirsch said that he wanted to correct a statement and said that first of all there are only 40 buildings, not 50 and said that only 7 had new story framing.   President Hirsch said that these 7 buildings that were looked at are not illegal; there is nothing illegal about them by definition.  Commissioner Guinnane said that he wanted the addresses of the 7 buildings so he could do his due diligence.  President Hirsch said that the addresses were a matter of public record.

Mr. Joe O’Donoghue of the Residential Builders Association (RBA) said that on 4109 Irving the owner got a permit, but getting a permit is not evidence that it is a legal permit; they got a fraudulent permit.   Mr. O’Donoghue said that the fact that at 4109 there is now no footing just means that there were footings, but those footings were pulled out after the investigation started.

Mr. O’Donoghue said that obviously they have removed the defective evidence and said he could not understand how Rodrigo Santos could sign off on drawings that were already defective, drawings that did not contain the full truth, drawings that misled the calculating officials doing the plan check and said that this is where the problem is.   Mr. O’Donoghue stated that these people are doing defacto demolition and said that it was a field inspector that discovered the lies on 4109 and now that evidence is removed.  Mr. O’Donoghue said that these people are avoiding the Planning Code and putting in defective drawings on the 40 or 50 projects.  Mr. O’Donoghue said that these foundations are not sufficient to carry the load.  Mr. O’Donoghue said that no one could say from drawings that the building is okay and said that this has put the lives of citizens in jeopardy.  Mr. O’Donoghue stated that the property at 4109 Irving Street demonstrates that and said that the investigation should begin where it left off.  Mr. O’Donoghue said that someone in the Plan Checking Division allowed this to happen and said that this was brought up before the Commission before and it was not Hanson Tom or Tom Hui, but someone within the process worked the system.  Mr. O’Donoghue said that contrary to what Commissioner Lee would say the Commission has a duty to protect the public.

President Hirsch said that Mr. O’Donoghue’s three minutes were up.  Mr. O’Donoghue said that this item was divided into two sections and he should be allowed to speak for three minutes on each item.  Mr. O’Donoghue stated that President Hirsch should not try to preclude him from bringing to attention President Hirsch’s inattention and neglect and said that the Commission could be sued for gross negligence.  Mr. O’Donoghue said that on the other 40 buildings that the Commission could not arbitrarily take those 40 buildings and go to the same engineer who worked for the woman who is under criminal indictment.   Mr. O’Donoghue aid that a person has already entered the witness protection program because he is going to give evidence against her and another person has gone to Hong Kong, but the fact is there is a cover up involved.  Mr. O’Donoghue stated that the woman who is responsible for most of these buildings was a chief fund raiser for Mayor Newsom and even did a fund raiser in Hong Kong.  Mr. O’Donoghue stated that she was allowed to be on the Housing Commission and was not forced to resign as she should have been for the simple reason that this is part of a cover up.  Mr. O’Donoghue said that the question is whether Commissioner Hirsch is a part of the cover up. Mr. O’Donoghue said that it would seem to him, and maybe there is no evidence that Commissioner Hirsch is involved, but said that Commissioner Hirsch was giving evidence today on his investigation of cases that are clearly subject to scrutiny, cases that have been brought to the notification of Federal authorities.  Mr. O’Donoghue said that the Federal authorities said that the case would not be pursued further until the RBA found out what was the conclusion of staff.  Mr. O’Donoghue said that contrary to what the Acting Director said there is no written report by anyone within DBI regarding these properties.  Mr. O’Donoghue said that structural engineers are told to change reports and this is a whole cover up.  Mr. O’Donoghue said that if there are new rules out there the RBA wants to know what they are and if the Department is now saying that someone can take an existing defective foundation and merely put a toe on that foundation and do some doweling then the whole nature of remodeling has been changed.  Mr. O’Donoghue stated that this would change the whole nature of safety and the whole nature of seismic and said he would not deviate from the issue by saying that seismic is not the issue; shear walling was never the issue.  Mr. O’Donoghue said that for President Hirsch to now say that the Department needs to move on is grossly negligent and said that the City Attorney should let the Commission know that if a Commission is accused and found guilty of gross negligence then the Commissioners are indeed liable.

        a.  Update on 2005/2006 budget.

        b.  Update on staffing shortages and staffing ratios as highlighted in Department’s organizational chart.

        c.   Report on New Residential Major Alteration Review Committee.

Acting Director Amy Lee said that the Commission has asked for an update on the budget that has been approved by the Board of Supervisors for the next fiscal year.   Ms. Lee gave some of the highlights:

32 full-time positions, most of them engineers and inspectors,

17 temporary positions,

17 new additional vehicles,

An increase of over 252% for training dollars,

An increase of 44% for software licenses

An increase of over 66% to accommodate computer replacements, updated Code books, emergency supplies and office supplies.

Commissioner Guinnane asked about what is happening with the MIS in the Department.   Ms. Lee said that the Department is moving forward with an assessment and a systems refresh and have received bids to update most of the hardware.  Ms. Lee reported that DBI was working with other City agencies so that the City will have a comprehensive tracking system.  Commissioner Guinnane asked why it was taking so long and costing so much and said that he was concerned that as time goes on and the Department does not spend its money so there is a surplus that will get raided by the Mayor’s Office.  Commissioner Guinnane stated that the Department will be up and ready to go and will have no money.  Ms. Lee said that she was confident that the Department would have a better assessment of the system by the fall.

Commissioner Guinnane asked about the increase in training and travel and asked for a breakdown of the two.   Ms. Lee said that the travel budget for 2004 was only $10,000 and now the budget for training is $382,000 because most of the training will not take place in San Francisco so staff will have to travel and that is the reason for the increases.

Commissioner Guinnane asked Ms. Lee about comments regarding the budget that came back from the Board of Supervisors.   Ms. Lee said that she would get a copy for the Commissioner.  Commissioner Guinnane said that he wanted to see the final budget for the Department, the one submitted and then the final one that was approved.  Commissioner Guinnane asked if the Department lost any of the positions it was trying to fill.  Ms. Lee said that the Department lost a couple of clerical positions, some principal clerk positions, a housing inspector and one senior inspector position.  Ms. Lee said that with the temporary exempt positions that the Department has available the Department would be able to make up for those lost positions.

Commissioner Guinnane asked about the vehicles and said that he sees that there are 16 new vehicles, but thought that the Department was trying to get 40.   Ms. Lee said that there were 22 new vehicles in the current fiscal year and the Department was getting 16 additional vehicles.

Commissioner Guinnane asked how many housing inspectors were being hired.   Ms. Lee said that there were 6 vacancies and 1 or 2 new positions available because there was a freeze on hiring in the housing section for a few years.  Commissioner Guinnane asked about the building inspectors and Ms. Lee said that there were 9 or 10 positions that were going to be filled and those should be filled by mid-August.

Commissioner Romero asked about the temporary exempt positions and what types of positions they were.   Ms. Lee said that the positions could be inspector positions that the Department utilizes for retirees as they are allowed to work up to 1040 hours per year.  Ms. Lee said that there are also clerical positions, but once again those people are only allowed to work the 1040 hours per year.  Ms. Lee stated that this budget would allow the Department to transition some of those positions that were temporary into permanent positions.

Ms. Lee said that in item 3b she tried to highlight some of the staffing issues and said that she detailed out where the new hires were going to be placed.   Ms. Lee said that there would be significant increases in the Public Services Division.  Ms. Lee said that this would address some of the Department’s issues with backlogs and 3-R reports.  Ms. Lee reported that there was an increase in the Building Inspection Division because some of the positions received this year were in response to City projects such as the PUC or Bayview Hunter’s Point.  Ms. Lee said that this past week or two the Department received 50 demolition permits for Bayview Hunter’s Point.  Ms. Lee said that she provided the Commission with an organization chart and said that there have been some management changes.  Ms. Lee said that a full time assistant manager was assigned to the commercial program as well as the residential program and staffing was significantly increased.  Ms. Lee said that this would allow the managers to focus on managing the division and closely monitor the staff rather than having to do plan checking which is what happened in the past.

Ms. Lee said that item 3c was a report on strategy on the Department’s part.   Ms. Lee said that DBI’s senior staff has been meeting biweekly with City Planning’s senior staff primarily to discuss major residential alterations and to discuss projects that are tantamount to a demolition or to address some of the issues the departments have had to face with people trying to do unlawful demolitions.  Ms. Lee said that the departments were trying to establish future policies, procedures and mechanisms that both departments can utilize and share information.

Mr. Joe O’Donoghue of the RBA said that regarding item #3c, unlawful demolitions, the RBA will be requesting the Planning Department to ask for all 40 of James Li’s buildings to be brought to the attention of the Planning Department to determine if, in fact, those buildings were defacto demolitions.   Mr. O’Donoghue stated that this was the real issue and said he presumed that since President Hirsch came on board he would have upgraded himself in terms of what were the real problems in this City.  Mr. O’Donoghue said that the RBA felt that this issue jeopardized and put in jeopardy the lives of the citizens, families and children in this City by allowing buildings on the guise that they got a lawful permit to go forward and carry on illegal work as that was the function of this Commission in the past, but it does not seem to be that way now.  Mr. O’Donoghue sated that recently an emergency order was issued and the building was taken down because the footing was removed.  Mr. O’Donoghue said that now the contractor in questions can put up a 2, 3 or 6 unit building so this contractor has bypassed the Planning process under this Commission’s premise because the contractor got an emergency order that ended any investigation.  Mr. O’Donoghue said that he had looked at this building when it was first purchased and there was nothing wrong with the footing, but the contractor arbitrarily took down the footing so it became an emergency.  Mr. O’Donoghue said that this was a clear case of fraud that will be brought to the attention of the Planning Department because the Planning Department is familiar with this type of thing and had a joint meeting with the Board of Permit Appeals.  Mr. O’Donoghue stated that this was a shame and said that the RBA will notify the Federal authorities as to the obstacles faced in the court here where this Commission has totally stonewalled and allowed what happened in the past and now to say that it is all clear and there is no illegal activity.  Mr. O’Donoghue said that these types of contractors have gotten a clear bill of conduct to proceed in the future.

There was no further public comment on these items. 

4.   Public Comment:   The BIC will take public comment on matters within the Commission’s jurisdiction that are not part of this agenda.

Mr. Henry Karnilowitz said that he wanted to congratulate Ron Tom, Carla Johnson and Wing Lau on being promoted and said that he trusted that these employees would serve the Department well.   Mr. Karnilowitz went on to say that he thought that another employee who should be considered for promotion from acting to permanent manager of Central Permit Bureau was Anita Lee as she is an excellent employee and served the Department well when there was a recent virus in the computer system.  Mr. Karnilowitz said that he would like to applaud Acting Director Amy Lee for getting authority to hire additional staff to fill the many vacant positions and said the he would hope the within a couple of months there would be a substantial reduction in the backlog.

Commissioner Guinnane asked what happened when someone called in for an inspection and the computers were down.   Ms. Lee said that to the extent that the Inspectors have already printed out their daily calendar they can still perform inspections.  Commissioner Guinnane asked if he had an inspection for next week did he call the Building Inspector in a particular area or did he call a clerk.  Ms. Lee said that she believed that with the Building Inspection Division the customer would call the Building Inspector directly, but with Plumbing and Electrical the customer would call the clerk.  Commissioner Guinnane said that he got a call last week from a contractor who called in for an inspection and was told that the computers were down and someone from the Department would call the contractor later to schedule the appointment; the contractor never heard from that individual.  Ms. Lee asked for the address.  Mr. Henry Karnilowitz said that actually for Building Inspection the customer has to go through a scheduling person between the hours of 8:30 a.m. and 3:00 p.m., but for Plumbing and Electrical the customer calls the Inspector.  Ms. Lee said that she had reversed the process.  Commissioner Guinnane asked why this process was changed because previously he would call the Building Inspector directly to set up an appointment.  Mr. Karnilowitz said that a contractor could call the Building Inspector on the morning of the inspection and get a window of time.  Commissioner Guinnane said that this was tying up two people to set up an inspection and asked why it was changed and why Building Inspectors are different from Housing, Electrical and Plumbing.  President Hirsch said that Acting Director Lee should be answering these questions.  Ms. Lee said that she believed this policy was changed under Larry Litchfield.  Ms. Lee asked Deputy Director Jim Hutchinson to come forward to speak on this issue.

Deputy Director Jim Hutchinson said that he thought that this was one of those efficiency items years ago that was brought up by the Controller’s Office, similar to the voice mail hell that the Department now enjoys.   . Mr. Hutchinson said that in the past the Inspectors all scheduled their own appointments and this allowed them to maximize their day; however this was thought to be inefficient by the Controller’s Office and the Department changed to comply.  Mr. Hutchinson said that he thought it was more effective to speak directly to the Inspector.  Commissioner Guinnane said that if this was a recommendation by the Controller’s Office why did the entire Department not change.  Mr. Hutchinson said that he would have to go back and look at that issue and why a decision was made at that time.  Commissioner Guinnane stated that he would like to take a look at changing this policy and going back to the way it was where the customer had direct contact with the Inspectors.  Ms. Lee said that this was something the Department would be looking into in the next six months or so.  President Hirsch said that he believed that this discussion should fall under Item #10a, inquiries to staff and asked that this item be confined to public comment for items not on the agenda.

Mr. Joe O’Donoghue of the RBA said that with all due respect to President Hirsch, colloquy between Commissioners and Supervisors is standard procedure in this City.   Mr. O’Donoghue said that if President Hirsch were to ask Jake McGoldrick or Ross Mikarimi he would find out that this is a part of the function of dialogue.  Mr. O’Donoghue said that he thought this was rude and improper.

Mr. O’Donoghue said that he was present to speak about why Steve Levin of the Center for Government Studies of Los Angeles and Ms. Judy Nelder of the Applied Ethics at the University of Santa Clara said that President Hirsch’s exemption was a classic conflict of interest case.   Mr. O’Donoghue said that two independent bodies that are involved with ethics in government quizzed about the process of this exemption and President Hirsch, by not telling all of the facts was guilty of the sin of omission.  Mr. O’Donoghue said that President Hirsch omitted crucial facts and in fact lied before the Ethics Commission when he told them that getting structural engineers was a problem.  Mr. O’Donoghue stated that up until now, there never was a problem in getting Structural Engineers to occupy the seats.  Mr. O’Donoghue said that President Hirsch led the Ethics Commission to understand that if he was not granted a waiver this entire Commission would fall apart.  Mr. O’Donoghue said that with this Administration from Gavin Newsom lying has become a value.  Mr. O’Donoghue said that lying would not be accepted by members of the construction industry or members of the RBA or by residents of this City at large.  Mr. O’Donoghue said that President Hirsch should have told the Ethics Commission that there is conflicts even at the Bridge Board where President Hirsch sits and was investigated for undue influence.  Mr. O’Donoghue said that President Hirsch should also have put out the fact that a fellow his wife is associated with gets City contracts.  Mr. O’Donoghue stated that President Hirsch came up clear on undue influence, but said that he was certainly adding to it.  President Hirsch said that he very much resented being called a liar.  Mr. O’Donoghue said that he resented very much President Hirsch’s mishmash of facts.  President Hirsch said that his wife is not with a firm that gets City contracts and said that Mr. O’Donoghue’s innuendos and twisting of facts and his high-faluting oratory was really out of order as far as he was personally concerned.  Mr. O’Donoghue said that President Hirsch’s comments were very well noted and said he was glad to see that President Hirsch found his comments high-faluting oratory.

5.   Discussion of DBI vehicles maintenance and repair bills along with presentation by Mr. Jim Johnson of Central Shops regarding DBI maintenance costs and service agreements.

Acting Director Amy Lee said that she had invited Jim Johnson and some other staff from Central Shops to make a presentation to the BIC as there were some concerns that previous reports had showed little maintenance costs.   Ms. Lee stated that one of the reasons that happened was because most of the cars are under repair lease programs and those costs are not carried over to DBI.  Ms. Lee said that she had provided the Commission with a four year cost history and said that in past years the Department did have very high costs, but that was because DBI had an older fleet of cars.

Mr. Jim Johnson of Central Shops said that he would be happy to answer any questions the Commission had with the maintenance costs.   Commissioner Guinnane said that in looking at the reports in past years there were maintenance costs of $157,000 and said he was interested in exploring the actual purchase price of the cars, but also the cost of buying extended warranties.  Mr. Johnson said that the City would buy the extended warranties with Departments such as the Police who put a lot of miles on vehicles, but a lot of City cars only get 4,000 miles a year.  Mr. Johnson stated that major repairs are usually after 5 or 6 years and that is well past any standard warranty.  Mr. Johnson stated that the hybrid cars get an 8-year warranty.  Commissioner Guinnane said that in looking at DBI’s cars a lot of them are 10 years old and asked if the criteria for getting rid of them would be based on age or mileage.  Mr. Johnson said that the problem is that the City does not put enough miles on a lot of these cars, but with the lease program tries to turn them over on an average of 9 years and said that with only 4,000 miles a year that is only 36,000 miles.  Mr. Johnson said that with being in a lease program Central Shops has been able to give DBI 5 cars per year over the past two years.  Mr. Johnson said that in this next year DBI would be purchasing 21 new cars.  Commissioner Guinnane asked if these vehicles were being lent out to any other Departments.  Ms. Lee said no, the Department has complete control over these vehicles.  Commissioner Guinnane asked that Mr. Johnson looked into the extended warranties on the cars with low mileage.  Mr. Johnson stated that it was something that he could look into, but said that the City looked into it in the past and it did not seem too cost effective.  

6.   Discussion and possible action to adopt the 2004 recommended changes to the San Francisco Electrical Code.    [David Green, Senior Electrical Inspector]

Mr. David Green, Senior Electrical Inspector said that on August 1, 2004 the 2004 California Electrical Code would become enforceable.   Mr. Green reported that this Code is based on the 2002 National Electrical Code and that Code was extensively renumbered for style to make it conform to other international Codes.  Mr. Green said that the amendments before the BIC were primarily for clarification and revisions to make them conform to this new style.  Mr. Green stated that these changes had been before the Code Advisory Committee for consideration and the CAC forwarded them onto the BIC for approval.  President Hirsch asked if any of the Commissioners had any questions.  There were none.  There was no public comment.

Commissioner Romero made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Guinnane to approve the recommended changes.   The motion carried unanimously.

RESOLUTION NO. BIC 038-05

7.   Discussion and possible action to approve the contract between the City & County of San Francisco and American Legal Publishing Corporation regarding publishing the Department of Building Inspection’s Building, Mechanical, Electrical, Plumbing and Housing Codes.  [Chief Building Inspector Laurence Kornfield, Technical Services Division]

Mr. Lou Aurea of the Department of Building Inspection Technical Services Division said that he would be reporting in place of Laurence Kornfield who could not be present as he was conducting a training session at DBI.  Mr. Aurea gave the Commission a brief summary as to the process of the RFP and the contract.  Mr. Aurea said that the BIC has the sole authority to contract for the publication for the San Francisco Housing, Electrical, Plumbing, Mechanical and Building Codes. Mr. Aurea said that the Department mailed out 14 RFP’s to people responding to possible bid on this publication and in the end four companies came forward with bids.  Mr. Aurea announced that the winning RFP went to American Legal, as their lowest cost for a 5-set Code was $34.95 with the nearest publisher, General Code, coming in at $45.

President Hirsch asked what happened to the updates from the present publisher of the Code.  Mr. Aurea said that American Legal would take over immediately and had graciously agreed to format and put together any changes to the Codes until this contract is ratified.  Mr. Aurea stated that right now the Department had a bridge agreement with General Code that if there are any new amendments submitted by the Board of Supervisors, they will go ahead and publish the supplement up until the actual transition to the new publisher.  Mr. Aurea said that he had already sent over electronically all of the present recipients to the supplemental of the Building Codes to the new publisher, American Legal.  President Hirsch asked if American Legal would get paid by the subscribers.  Mr. Aurea said that was correct because this basically is a zero cost contract, which means that the Department pays virtually nothing; the City will only pay a $30 a month web link fee because American Legal are hosting the Codes, the Municipal Codes as well as the Building Codes.

Mr. Aurea stated that the Codes are going to be published on the Internet and they would be free to the public.  President Hirsch asked what was the length of this contract.  Mr. Aurea said that it was for two years from the date of signing and then there are 4, one-year options at the Administration’s discretion whether or not to renew.   Commissioner Fillon asked when the Code would be on line.  Mr. Aurea said that it would be within the next few months.

There was no public comment on this item.

Commissioner Romero made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Fillon, that the contract be accepted.  The motion carried unanimously.

RESOLUTION NO. BIC 039-05

8.   Update on 2508 – 19^th Avenue. [Deputy Director Jim Hutchinson]

Deputy Director Jim Hutchinson said that he had put together a short memo for the Commissioners to apprise them of the facts on these cases that involved 3 buildings.   Mr. Hutchinson said that primarily work was begun at 2508 – 19^th Avenue that was done improperly and undermined the foundation of the corner building which was 1745 Ulloa Street.  Mr. Hutchinson said that this work also affected the rear yard and perhaps some of the sidewall at 2512 – 19^th Avenue.  Mr. Hutchinson stated that the Department held a hearing and as part of the Director’s hearing, there were 3 conditions placed on the property owner. Mr. Hutchinson said that one condition was that the property owner file a permit within 10 days, which would be up today and as of Friday no permits were filed.  The second condition was that the permit be picked up within 10 days and the property owner would have 30 days to begin that work.  Mr. Hutchinson said that if the property owner does not file the permits it would be up to DBI to go ahead and decide if the Department wanted to undertake this work and then lien the property.   Mr. Hutchison reported that the Department had asked Mr. Frank Rollo to go out to view the situation and said that occurred on June 29 where Mr. Rollo determined that more soil should be banked against both of these properties to try to prevent it from slipping any further.  Commissioner Guinnane said that he wanted to ask some questions of Wing Lau as Mr. Lau was out at the property and Mr. Hutchinson was not.

Commissioner Guinnane asked if Mr. Rollo went into the house at the corner of 19^th Avenue and Ulloa.  Mr. Lau said that unfortunately he and Mr. Rollo did not have the opportunity to go into the house, but did look at the foundation.  Commissioner Guinnane said that he was disturbed by a memo that said that the Department observed no visual signs of stress in the existing homes.  Commissioner Guinnane said that he had been in the corner house and said that it is all cracked inside, all the corners and the molding is coming off the ceilings.  Commissioner Guinnane stated that he did not know how somebody could do a memo saying that there were really no problems out there.  Commissioner Guinnane said that the house has obviously moved.  Commissioner Guinnane asked Mr. Lau about his opinion as to how much the corner house had settled, or dropped.  Mr. Lau stated that he thought the house had settled a couple of inches.  Commissioner Guinnane said that he could not figure out why there was not more important action taken on this by a City Department when a house had dropped 2 inches. Mr. Lau said that the City Engineers had gone out to the property twice.  Commissioner Guinnane said that he thought that if Mr. Rollo had gone inside the house he would not have written the memo saying that there were no problems out there.  Mr. Lau said that when Mr. Rollo did the inspection he did not feel that there was any imminent danger.  Commissioner Guinnane asked Mr. Lau what would have happened to the house if the Commissioner had not called the Department and the contractor kept going the way he was.  Mr. Lau said that in that case something could have happened to the building, but there was no way to predict it.  Mr. Lau stated that it could have gotten much worse.  Commissioner Guinnane said that he thought the house would have collapsed.  Commissioner Guinnane said that he could not figure out why the Department was giving the contractor so much time to come in and do this and then the contractor is waiting until the very last day.  Commissioner Lee asked if the Department knew who owned the property that is under construction.  Mr. Lau answered that the owner and the contractor are one and the same.  Mr. Lau stated that the Department could look into what is happening out there.  Commissioner Guinnane asked if there was no permit picked up or filed today what would be the position of the Department and what would the Department do to remedy this problem very quickly.  Mr. Hutchinson said that there was a hearing regarding this property that he did not attend, but said that it was clear that the Commission wanted the Department to go forward and do the work.  Commissioner Guinnane stated that the Department had given this contractor every opportunity and said that he would recommend that the Department prepare the documentation and go forward.  Commissioner Guinnane said that at the next meeting he wanted to see a drawing, the drawing that was submitted that authorized this shoring because he thought that the beams were well undersized.  President Hirsch asked if the original drawings and permit drawings submittal mentioned underpinning or some note about how the excavation was going to be carried forward out there and did the contractor notify the corner property to give them access to underpin their building as required.  Commissioner Guinnane said that he had been told that there was no notice given and that the permit did not show any shoring or excavation at all.  Commissioner Guinnane stated that he was driving by the property and saw the way it was being excavated and called the City to shut the job down because he could see that the contractor was going to get into a huge problem.  Commissioner Guinnane said that then within 3 days he saw a huge Kumatsu in there opening up and cutting the side of the property, then the beams were put in and they had completely undermined that whole foundation from one end to the other.

President Hirsch asked for public comment.

Joe O’Donoghue of the RBA said that the Residential Builders Association have always been concerned with safety.   Mr. O’Donoghue said that during his reign as President of the RBA there were four Mexican workers killed on a job site because of inadequate underpinning and at that time there was inadequate control.  Mr. O’Donoghue stated that this case was very disturbing because it was in the works since May 3^rd.  Mr. O’Donoghue said that Mr. Rollo is an excellent Geotechnical Engineer, but said that the Department should have had a Structural Engineer out there to complement his report.  Mr. O’Donoghue said that Commissioner Guinnane was the one who got the Inspectors out there and if an earthquake would have hit that building could be down by now.  Mr. O’Donoghue said that the RBA has long advocated a system that when there is a scofflaw contractor out there, the Department needs to make a fast assessment for the City and not wait on bureaucratic delays until the harm really gets done.   Mr. O’Donoghue stated that if an earthquake were to hit tomorrow, Mr. Rollo did not put in his report that soil is going to keep that building standing; the building would come down.  Mr. O’Donoghue said that he knew this because part of his income was made from lifting buildings and said he was always nervous when raising those buildings up off footings to put more shoring underneath.  Mr. O’Donoghue said that he immediately tried to get that work done as fast as possible even though proper shoring was done because if an earthquake hit those building could be coming down.  Mr. O’Donoghue said that the Department was playing Russian roulette with this contractor and the safety factor, which is the mission of this Department.

President Hirsch said that he trusted that the Department would move on this and thanked Commissioner Guinnane for bringing up this item.

9.   Review of Communication Items.  At this time, the Commission may discuss or take possible action to respond to communication items received since the last meeting.

• Memorandum dated June 27, 2005 from Amy Lee, Acting Director to All DBI Staff regarding Acting Deputy Director of Permit Services.
• Letter dated June 28, 2005 from Amy Lee, Acting Director to Honorable Chris Daly, Member, Board of Supervisors regarding Subdivision Code Section 1304 and 724-730 Van Ness.
• Memorandum dated June 30, 2005 from Lewis W. Loeven III, Executive Director of the Department of Telecommunications & Information Services (DTIS) to City Department Heads and the Board of Supervisors regarding SFGTV 2^nd Government Channel 78.
• Memorandum dated July 5, 2005 from Amy Lee, Acting Director to All DBI Staff regarding Appointments of Chief Building Inspector.
• Various letters dated April 13, 2005 through July 7, 2005 between Mr. Michael Tsang and DBI staff regarding properties located at 11 & 21 Castenada Avenue.
• Letter and report dated June 29, 2005 from Mary McAllister, Foreperson 2004-2005 San Francisco Grand Jury regarding its “Continuity Report”.
• g.Letter dated June 21, 2005 from Gloria L. Young, Clerk of the Board regarding File No. 051142 regarding Construction and Demolition Debris Recovery Ordinance to be reviewed by the Code Advisory Committee and agendized for a future meeting.
• Copies of letter received from customers recognizing a job well done by DBI employees.
• Year to date financial report.

Commissioner Guinnane said that he wanted to speak about item #e regarding properties on Castenada Avenue and item #f regarding what the Department is doing to satisfy issues with the Grand Jury and the Superior Court Judge.   Commissioner Lee said that he wanted to discussion item #g.

Acting Director Amy Lee said that she wanted to report on item #b and said that at a previous Commission meeting a member of the public was concerned about how the Department was handling subdivisions.   Ms. Lee reported that the Department is not in conflict so this is not an issue.

Commissioner Guinnane asked Ms. Lee about 11 and 21 Castenada.   Ms. Lee said that Mr. George Tsang came to her office to complain about the way his permits were being handled. Ms. Lee said that Mr. Tsang appealed the sidewalk permit for 11 Castenada to the Board of Supervisors. Ms. Lee stated that DBI staff looked at the permits for 11 Castenada and found nothing wrong with the issuance of those permits.  President Hirsch asked what the concerns were.  Ms. Lee said that there were issues about sidewalk encroachments, soil and how many stories were being built on single-family homes.  Ms. Lee said that Mr. Tsang, the owner of 21 Castenada felt that he was being unfairly treated by some of DBI’s staff members, but said that the Department had some concerns and did not issue a permit for Mr. Tsang because he had yet to provide some additional permit details regarding story count as Mr. Tsang believes that his building is only four stories and the Department believes it is five.  Ms. Lee said that she believed that staff had gone beyond normal customer service for Mr. Tsang and said that Mr. Tsang had worked directly with the Deputy Director, a Senior Inspector and Mr. Wing Lau.  Ms. Lee said that she had asked Mr. Lau to do an assessment of the projects and said that the Department was just asking Mr. Tsang to comply with its requests.  Ms. Lee said that one of Mr. Tsang’s engineers or his surveyor retracted the original submission so Mr. Tsang needs to provide another report to DBI.

President Hirsch said that he was looking at the floor plans and could not identify whose seal was on it.   Commissioner Guinnane asked that President Hirsch let Ms. Lee finish her report, as there were some issues about the engineering seal.  Ms. Lee said that she was just addressing Mr. Tsang’s complaint about staff and said that she did not believe DBI staff mishandled this.

Commissioner Guinnane said that this was not a neighborhood complaint, but said that Mr. Tsang called him up and asked him to come and look at this house on Castenada.   Commissioner Guinnane said that he looked at the property and said that he determined that the story count was above what was approved.  Commissioner Guinnane stated that he told Mr. Tsang that he had also looked at Mr. Tsang’s property and it had the same story count so if the Commissioner went after one property he would have to go after both.  Commissioner Guinnane said that he did not want to get involved and told Mr. Tsang to forget about this issue, but Mr. Tsang was very adamant that the Commissioner push forward.  Commissioner Guinnane stated that he then turned in both properties so that is how this came to be an issue.  Commissioner Guinnane said that Michael Tsang, George Tsang’s son, is a licensed engineer who works for DPW and apparently Michael drew the drawings, but did not put his stamp on them.  Commissioner Guinnane stated that Jimmy Jen was the engineer of record. Commissioner Guinnane said that Jimmy Jen came to the Commission and told him that he had initially stamped one set of drawings for the house to go forward, but said that George Tsang came to his office four times when he was not there, took his stamp and signed Mr. Jen’s name.  Commissioner Guinnane said that this was really messy situation.  President Hirsch said that this was not good.  Commissioner Guinnane said that he asked George Tsang why his son Michael did not stamp the drawings as he has a license and George Tsang said that his son did not have insurance to cover this type of work and was worried about getting sued.  Commissioner Guinnane said that if the Tsang’s were going to live in the house obviously Michael would not sue himself.  Commissioner Guinnane said that he would like to go back and look up the revisions on this property to look at the stamp and the signature to see if the allegation is actually true that Jimmy Jen’s signature was forged.  President Hirsch said that it was illegal under State law for one engineer to stamp drawings that were not prepared under his direction so Mr. Jen is in more trouble than just story count.  Ms. Lee said that she believed that the surveyor withdrew his report.  Commissioner Guinnane said that the surveyor withdrew his drawings for the simple reason that George Tsang gave him certain heights, certain lengths and they were not true.

Commissioner Guinnane said that the issue is that the house has five floors, possibly six and it is longer than the drawing calls for.   Commissioner Guinnane stated that George Tsang appealed this to the Board of Supervisors and lost there for the simple reason that he talked about encroachment issues and minor encroachments.  Commissioner Guinnane said that the neighbors on Castenada got up at the meeting and showed George Tsang’s house and said that they were only asking for the same as Mr. Tsang was allowed.  Commissioner Guinnane said that he wanted the Department to go back and look at the actual drawings that were submitted and the stamp on them.  Commissioner Guinnane suggested that the Department go back and look at some of Jimmy Jen’s drawings, drawings that he did for somebody else, and compare it to see if it was a different designer.  Acting Director Lee said that she knew this was a concern, but said that she believed that the report issued by Carla Johnson was pretty inclusive, as the property owner still has to provide substantial information to get a building permit and the valuation of the project is also in question.  Ms. Lee said that she was concerned about the Department comparing drawing styles.  Commissioner Guinnane said that he would do it himself if it was a problem and said that he would look at the stamp and the signatures.  Commissioner Guinnane said that Jimmy Jen admits that he did the first one.

President Hirsch said that he thought that BOPELS (The Bureau of Professional Engineers and Land Surveyors) should be alerted of this because for someone to sign someone else’s drawing, whether they forge the signature or not is counter to the Engineer’s registration ethics and it is illegal.   President Hirsch stated that he did not want to break anybody’s profession, but if someone is doing that it is an illegal procedure.

Commissioner Guinnane asked if the Commission could move onto item #f.   Acting Director Lee said that she did have a two-page report with the Grand Jury comments, but it was in her computer and the computer was down yesterday.  Ms. Lee said that she would provide that information to the Commissioners.  Commissioner Guinnane said that it could be agendized.  Ms. Lee said that the Department had made some progress to implement some of the recommendations, but with issues such as the bar coding, the Department is not ready to do that immediately.  President Hirsch stated that the Department had 60 days to respond.  Ms. Lee said that she would be providing a response to the Grand Jury.  President Hirsch asked that the response be presented at the next meeting.  Commissioner Guinnane said that some of these issues need to be prioritized such as the bar coding.  Commissioner Guinnane stated that he had suggested that DBI look at the UPS system and said that the Department needs to come up with a comprehensive plan and a design for the future.  Commissioner Guinnane said that he had been talking about this for two or three years and the Department does not seem to be getting anywhere and now the Commission is asking for information and once again the computer system is down.  Ms. Lee said that the computers were down because of a virus.  Commissioner said that if it is not one thing it is another and said that he did not know if it was such a good idea for DBI to go with other departments.  Ms. Lee said that going with the other departments would allow for a more comprehensive approach and help get more information if the department is working with Planning or the Fire Department on a project.

President Hirsch said that Commissioner Lee wanted to discuss item #g.   Commissioner Lee said that he understood that the Code Advisory Committee was going to meet and discuss this and asked if the CAC could consider how this would be implemented.  Commissioner Lee said he wanted to know if the City has enough facilities in San Francisco or nearby to accept this.  Commissioner Lee asked that the CAC consider how the Department could give incentives to the contractors and construction projects to reuse and recycle.  Commissioner Lee said that he knew that many of the larger construction projects already do a lot of recycling, but said that the Department should look at what could be done with the smaller contractors.  Commission Lee stated that right now there are facilities to accept concrete and steel, but the City has to look at what to do with the green waste as well.  Ms. Lee said that this was started by the Department of the Environment so they are making some recommendations and trying to implement this.  Commissioner Guinnane said that he thought that there was something in place for the past two years and said that DBI gave the Department of the Environment $100,000 for that particular reason.  Ms. Lee said that the money given to the Department of the Environment was more for environmental Codes, but not for this.  Ms. Lee stated that there was a previous version of this legislation that was more onerous on DBI and the contractors. 

President Hirsch called for public comment.

Mr. Joe O’Donoghue of the RBA said that George Tsang was a friend of his, but said that the RBA would not get involved in this case.   Mr. O’Donoghue said that it perturbed him somewhat that the Department is ignoring the fraud element and that is crucial because if former employees are committing fraud with current employees this is the root of the problem.  Mr. O’Donoghue said that contrary to what Acting Director Lee said and getting Carla Johnson to make up a quantitative report that can be check off, all George or the other project sponsor have to do is to go to the Planning Department to get a variance for the improper story count.  Mr. O’Donoghue stated that this would probably be supported by both property owners especially if there is no opposition.  Mr. O’Donoghue said that the property owners would get clear with the story count problem and some of the other issues.  Mr. O’Donoghue said that DBI could not just wash its hands like Pontius Pilate by saying that the Department has done its job by doing this quantitative report, but ignoring the fraud, which happened with Julie Lee.  Mr. O’Donoghue stated that when Julie Lee came into this Department and hired an ex-employee out of this Department the fraud began.  Mr. O’Donoghue said that it was ironic that once again it is the construction industry that brought this to the notification of the Department and the result has been that it opened a Pandora’s Box.  Mr. O’Donoghue said that the Department still continues with the philosophy that it is not really the Department’s problem, but meantime then a story hits the press about a bad contractor then the Residential Builders are painted with the same brush.  Mr. O’Donoghue stated that he and other members of the RBA appeared before the Commission because they have suffered enough with bad images and are tired of being the scapegoats for jerks out there that break the rules.  Mr. O’Donoghue said that the RBA was tired of an indifferent bureaucracy ignoring it or wiping it under the rug, but part of that bureaucracy is to blame because there is undue influence that still exists in the Department and it is not being wiped out.  Mr. O’Donoghue said that with the methodical method that the RBA has proceeded along he would guarantee that the undue influence will be wiped out and gone in the next six months and some heads within the Department would roll.

Commissioner Guinnane said that he had one question based on Mr. O’Donoghue’s comments and said that there was some suggestion about sending this issue to Planning.   Commissioner Guinnane said that he did not think this was a Planning issue.  Commissioner Guinnane asked President Hirsch if 50 feet was allowed in a wood frame building and it was going from four stories to five stories what would that trigger in the building.  President Hirsch said that it was not allowed as it is not a question of 50 feet it is only four stories of wood framing.  President Hirsch stated that there might be a height limit as well.

10.  Review Commissioner’s Questions and Matters.

• Inquiries to Staff.  At this time, Commissioners may make inquiries to staff regarding various documents, policies, practices, and procedures, which are of interest to the Commission.

 Commissioner Guinnane asked about the policy of a customer going through a clerk to arrange for a building inspection, versus going directly to the inspectors in electrical and plumbing.   Acting Director Lee said that this could be a future agenda item.  Commission Guinnane said that he thought the Department should go back to calling the inspectors directly as he thought it would be more beneficial.  Commissioner Fillon asked how a customer knew which inspector to call.  Ms. Lee said that the Department publishes district maps and the inspector’s name is on the job card.

Commissioner Guinnane asked about a job on Filbert Street where the job is shut down because of an issue on the top floor.   Commissioner Guinnane said that the drawing called for the outside wall to remain and the drawing showed two walls to be built there when the existing walls are 2 X 4.  Commissioner Guinnane stated that then there was a detail that called for sheet rock on the walls and it really was not marked, but Commissioner Guinnane said that he believed it was outside because it called for waterproof sheetrock.  Commissioner Guinnane stated that this job was shut down and said he did not believe this was fair.  Commissioner Guinnane asked that the Commission call for a special meeting to resolve this issue.  Commissioner Guinnane stated that the contractor took down the two 2 X 4 outside walls, stripped it apart, framed the 2 X 6’s, sheet rocked it, and then when he stood up the walls he put the old 2 X 4’s back in.  Commissioner Guinnane said that the City’s position is that he took the wall down, dismantled it and now the contractor is out of compliance, but he is trying to comply with the drawing.

Deputy Director Jim Hutchinson said that Commissioner Guinnane was correct because on the plan the contractor showed the wall as existing.   Mr. Hutchinson said that when he talked to the contractor on the site, the contractor had carefully removed all the 2 X 4 framing, set it aside and said that the contractor thought that an existing wall could be removed, framed to the standards that were on the approved plans and then reinsert the 2 X 4’s.  Mr. Hutchinson said that the contractor wrote a letter asking for a determination.  Mr. Hutchinson stated that his determination was that the wall was not an existing wall anymore and based on that determination the contractor asked for a hearing. Secretary Aherne said that this appeal was scheduled for the August 1^st meeting and stated that she would need to post this building ten days in advance of the hearing.  Secretary Aherne said that there might be a problem with the Commission having a quorum on the first, as Commissioner Fillon would not be available and Phil Ting would need to be replaced; normally the person filing the complaint would like to have all of the Commissioners present.  Commissioner Guinnane said that if there was a special meeting it would probably only last one hour and said that he was just trying to be fair to this person as the contractor was closed down for one month and it is very harsh on him.  Commissioner Romero said that he was not opposed to having a special meeting, but said that if the Commission did not have to have one it would be better.  There was discussion about when a full Commission would be available and Commissioner Guinnane reminded everyone that the appellant would have to get four votes regardless of how many Commissioners were present so that is why it is important to have everyone present.  Secretary Aherne reminded the Commission that if all of the Commissioners were not present the appellant could request that the appeal not be heard.

Mr. Joe O’Donoghue of the RBA said that he did not know the project or the project sponsor, but said that this is a classic case from the industry perspective of bureaucratic paradoxes that make no sense.   Mr. O’Donoghue said that if the plans in question call for the substitution of sheet rock on the outside wall the only logical way to do that since it was already disclosed on the plan was to take the wall down, lift if off then put the sheetrock on and lift it back up.  Mr. O’Donoghue said that the question was if there was a violation of the rules and obviously there was not.  Mr. O’Donoghue stated that the next question would be why the Department would put a contractor through this delay because it is a logical conclusion that this is the only way to do it and there should be some way within the system to avoid a special meeting.  Mr. O’Donoghue said that the way to avoid this would be for the Acting Director to overrule Mr. Hutchinson and said that this would have happened in the past.  Mr. O’Donoghue said that this was why this Commission was created so that problems in the field could be taken care of.  Mr. O’Donoghue said that this would be his suggestion, to have the Acting Director make a decision.

Acting Director Lee said that the contractor did not contact her or her office regarding this project. Commissioner Guinnane said that the plumbing contractor called him about it so he went to look at the project and could see no other way that this could be done.  Commissioner Guinnane said that sometimes he gets troubled because he sees some City employees, who work for the public, and said that some employees get a joy out of somebody else’s misery.  Commissioner Guinnane stated that the contractor is afraid of being sued by the owners in Colorado.  Commissioner Guinnane asked if Ms. Lee would be willing to meet with the project sponsor and go over the drawings.  Ms. Lee said that she would contact the Commissioner to arrange a time.  Commissioner Fillon said that this is a very common problem in San Francisco because the homes are right next to each other and this occurs often in remodeling.  Commissioner Fillon stated that he would like to see something come out of this that is really definite so that the public know exactly how to go about doing this and staying compliant.  Commissioner Fillon said that the foundation issue that was previously discussed is very similar.  Ms. Lee said that once the Department has more staffing she would hope to implement having required preconstruction site meetings so the inspector could go out prior to the permits being approved by the Plan Checkers.  Ms. Lee said that this would help the Department in dealing with remodels and demolitions.  Commissioner Guinnane said that in this particular case there was no fraud or malice and said that the contractor spent a year and a half going through the process with notification and did not do serial permitting.

• Future Meetings/Agendas.  At this time, the Commission may discuss and take action to set the date of a Special Meeting and/or determine those items that could be placed on the agenda of the next meeting and other future meetings of the Building Inspection Commission.

Commissioner Fillon said that he and former Commissioner Ting had been working on a Committee to fill the vacant spots on some of the Commissions that the BIC appoints.   Commissioner Fillon stated that they had come up with two candidates for the Access Appeals Commission that could be submitted at the next meeting as the Access Appeals Commission is having problems with having a quorum.  Commissioner Fillon asked Secretary Aherne to send copies of the candidate’s resumes to all of the Commissioners as he would not be present at the August 1^st meeting.

Commissioner Guinnane asked if he could get an updated on 2508 – 19^th Avenue.  Commissioner Guinnane said that he had been asking for a report on the accountability of the Plan Checkers and the Engineers to see exactly what each individual does.  Commissioner Guinnane said that there was discussion at the last meeting about embarrassing some employees and said that this was not his intent, but said that he wanted to see where the problems are and why there is a backlog.  Commissioner Guinnane stated that he wanted to look at all of the Divisions, the number of employees in each and where there are real problems with the staffing to determine if the Department should overstaff certain Divisions.  Commissioner Guinnane said that he also asked about the waiver of the fees of over $1M for the remodel on City Hall.  Commissioner Guinnane asked for a follow up on 21 Castenada.  Commissioner Guinnane said that he spoke with Deputy City Attorney Judy Boyajian regarding 323 – 26^th Avenue and the determination to overrule the Board of Permit Appeals.  Commissioner Guinnane said that he spoke with Secretary Aherne about setting a date to move forward with the sub-committee to look at applicants for a permanent Director and to look at the process.  Secretary Aherne said that she would contact the three Commissioners on that sub-committee to set a date for a meeting.

11.   Public Comment:  The BIC will take public comment on matters within the Commission’s jurisdiction that are not part of this agenda.

12.  Adjournment. 

Commissioner Guinnane made a motion, seconded by President Hirsch, that the meeting be adjourned.   The motion carried unanimously.

RESOLUTION NO. BIC 040-05

The meeting was adjourned at 12:05 p.m.