1.

Call to Order and Roll Call – Roll call was taken and a quorum was certified.

COMMISSION MEMBERS PRESENTS:

Rodrigo Santos, President
Bobbie Sue Hood, Vice-President
Alfonso Fillon, Commissioner
Esther Marks, Commissioner

Denise D’Anne, Commissioner
Matt Brown, Commissioner
Roy Guinnane, Commissioner

Ann Aherne, Commission Secretary

D.B.I. REPRESENTATIVES:

Frank Y. Chiu, Director
Amy Lee, Assistant Director
Ken Harrington, Special Assistant to the Director
Jim Hutchinson, Deputy Director
William Wong, Deputy Director
Wing Lau,Chief Building Inspector
Sonya Harris, Secretary

2.

President’s Announcements.

a.

President’s letter to the Editor of the San Francisco Chronicle regarding the May 2, 2004 Chronicle article titled  “Grim Forecast Sees Housing in tatters After Major S.F. Quake.”

President Santos read the last paragraph of a letter that he sent to the Chronicle.  It read, “As President of the Building Inspection Commission and a Structural Engineer, the safety and stability of our city’s buildings is my primary concern.  I will seek to resolve the differences between the DBI and the Applied Technology Council as well as fully implementing and enforcing San Francisco and California’s building codes as they pertain to structural integrity in this geologically volatile area.  The Commissioners and staff of the Department of Building Inspection are completely committed to the spirit of governmental transparency.  We will make the “Earthquake Risk” report available to the public with the highest quality and clarity of information and images to best safeguard this city’s homes and neighborhoods. “

Commissioner Brown said that he thought that the letter was very well thought out and said that it was a shame this letter did not get the publicity it deserved.

Mr. Joe O’Donoghue congratulated Commissioner Santos for taking a strong vigorous stand and said that of course this would not get published.  Mr. O’Donoghue mentioned Beyond Chron.org as a final forum for the public to get true facts.  Mr. O’Donoghue said that he would be starting a neighborhood newspaper later this year.  Mr. O’Donoghue said that David Prowler testified at a previous meeting that there was a RFP put out for the contract on the program for CAPSS and said that it was put out for bid, but it was a closed bid.  Mr. O’Donoghue said that this Commission has been extremely responsible about making everything at the BIC an open and transparent process and said that due to the fiscal problems that exist everywhere in the City this program had to be cut short.

b.

Update on President and DBI staff’s meeting with ATC regarding CAPSS issues.

President Santos stated that he held a meeting in his office regarding the CAPSS report with DBI staff, Commissioner Marks and representatives from ATC and said that he felt that the meeting was very productive.  President Santos said that the quality of the maps was reviewed and said that he was quite satisfied with that.  President Santos reported on the invoices and the fact that this report needs to get out to the public as soon as possible and said that there was some very candid discussion about this issue.  President Santos said that DBI had assurances from ATC that they were going to respond adequately and completely to all of the issues that were brought up by the Department.  President Santos stated that once that has taken place he thought that this would be a worthy document that needs to be published quickly.  Commissioner Marks said that the Commissioners were reminded about the contract being a fixed bid contract and the task of Phase II is only ½ completed.  Commissioner Marks stated that the Department does have a Federal requirement to produce a seismic plan by November of this year.  Commissioner Marks said that she felt that the Department has to complete its responsibility.

Mr. Joe O’Donoghue of the Residential Builders Association said that to correct Commissioner Marks’ remark it is the City that has to meet the Federal requirement by November, not this Department, with an update for FEMA.  Mr. O’Donoghue said that all of the other bureaucracies, such as DPW and other departments couldn’t depend on DBI to carry the cost for their responsibilities as fees are directed toward plan approval.  Mr. O’Donoghue said that any other study, no matter how it impacts DBI, has to have a process that goes through the Mayor’s Office and other departments and lays out who is responsible for the work.  Mr. O’Donoghue said that the City is in a financial crisis and said that there would be cutbacks in services and employment; it would be a disgrace to give out another $700,000 when that could be used to keep the emergency ward at San Francisco General, considering that the City already knows what this study contains.  Mr. O’Donoghue said that the Planning Department is full of documentation for those who are knowledgeable in the building industry.  Mr. O’Donoghue said that the solution would be to require when buildings are transferred to do the seismic upgrading, but the burden of putting that on the taxpayers and people going into old age was considered and that is the reason a compromise was reached.

3.

Director's Reports.   [Director Frank Chiu]

a.

Financial Status of Fiscal Year 2003/2004 and status of proposed budget for 2004/2005.

Director Chiu said that essentially for the current fiscal year 2003/2004 the only major item that was a deficit was as a result of the DTIS work order to upgrade DBI’s backup system, network server and Novell server systems. Director Chiu reported that this increased the budget by $864,000.  Director Chiu said that was covered by a surplus transfer of funds to address these issues. 

Director Chiu said that for the proposed budget for 2004/2005 it is a moving target and everyday Taras Madison and Amy Lee have been in contact with the Mayor’s Office to work on the details.  Director Chiu said that Commissioner Guinnane had also met with the City Attorney’s Office to work to resolve this proposed budget and said he was not sure when data would be finalized.  Director Chiu said that he would report back to the Commission as detailed unfolded.

Vice-President Hood asked about the $864,000 for the upgrade and backup system and asked if that looked as if it were going to pass through the Mayor’s Office.  Director Chiu said that those funds were already transferred for this fiscal year.

Commissioner Brown said that he wanted to know about the City Attorney’s Office work order being reduced by $750,000 and asked how firm this number was considering the workload that DBI has with the City Attorney’s Office (CAO).  Director Chiu said that last fiscal year was an unusually high year for payments to the CAO’s due to two high profile cases and the Department feels that this amount will be less this year.  Commissioner Brown stated that he wanted the Department to have the resources to pursue large cases if they come up.

Commissioner Guinnane said that himself, Director Chiu, Ms. Lee and Mr. Harrington met with City Attorney Dennis Herrera and some of his staff last week.  Commissioner Guinnane said that the amount was cut down by $750,000 and right now the Department has about $500,000 in a separate account that has been collected, but not yet transferred over to DBI; the budget is $1.7M and the Commission will continue to look at the money every quarter starting in 2005 to see if the Department is on target with that amount; if not the money in the fund will be used to subsidize any additional amounts. 

Ms. Lee said that with the exclusion of the Jen case and the AIMCO case DBI’s budget to the City Attorney’s Office is usually $900,000 - $1M so $500,000 was added to that for the UMB cases and other cases that might come up.  Commissioner Brown said that he wanted to make sure that the Department was not cutting down on its efforts to go after scofflaws to send the message that Codes cannot be violated.

Commissioner Fillon wanted to know if the reduction in cell phones included emergency response staff.  Director Chiu said that it did not.

b.

DBI activities report.

Director Chiu stated that he was reporting on January, February and March activities.  Director Chiu highlighted some of the activities that the Department is proud of and said that he wanted to thank Deputy Director William Wong, Deputy Director Jim Hutchinson, and Assistant Director Amy Lee for their leadership in making sure that the Department continues to supply customer service.  Director Chiu said that in comparing DBI to other cities for the most part DBI is way ahead of other cities particularly in the permit turnaround time and said that in inspection turnaround time the Department is responding to 97% of requests in two days.  Director Chiu said that customers felt that a one or two day turnaround time was more than exceptional.  Director Chiu reported that more than 30,622 inspections had been done for January, February and March by the all of the inspection divisions.  Director Chiu said that in that time the Department received a total of 1,700 complaints and a total of 15, 154 permits were processed.  Director Chiu referred to the over the counter turnaround time which was 70% of all commercial applications being approved in one day and 90% of residential.  Director Chiu reported that 34,000 telephone calls were received by DBI personnel and thanked DBI staff for service to its clients.

Mr. Joe O’Donoghue of the Residential Builders Association thanked the Director for an excellent report and said that this was exactly what the public needs to know because it puts the facts out there to totally disparage, dispute and make ridiculous the claims of the Chronicle that somehow or other this Department is a department out of control and subject to undue influences.  Mr. O’Donoghue stated by illustrating and laying out the amount of work that the employees of this Department have done it is a credit to their morale and the level of their commitment despite the haranguing they have been getting and the imputations of neglect from the press.  Mr. O’Donoghue said that he hoped that this report would be done on a monthly basis.  Mr. O’Donoghue said that this work was a credit to the Director, the Department and to the Commission, but said that there was one thing that still had to be done and that is in the Plan Check Division. Mr. O’Donoghue stated that Plan Check really needs to be looked at and after more reports come in it may necessitate having a special review committee.  Mr. O’Donoghue said that he was going to schedule an appointment with the Monitor to further advance what he has already been talking about with officials outside of the City concerning that section because it is a section that has severe problems.  Mr. O’Donoghue said that RBA members have found delays in the present and in the past in this division because it is a division that is operating under its own philosophy and the delays are enormous; the amount of volume that goes through that division is terms of revenue is enormous.  Mr. O’Donoghue stated that this section should be brought up to the level of productivity as to the other sections within DBI.    

Discussion regarding President Santos and Commissioner Guinnane’s site visit to 786 – 35^th Avenue as requested at the May 3, 2004 meeting.  [President Santos & Commissioner Guinnane].

Commissioner Guinnane said that he went out to the site to verify the Notice of Violation and said that on the notice it stated that the Inspector that went out there was Mr. Duffy and he refused to write a violation.   Commissioner Guinnane said that Inspector Sweeney then went out and he refused to write the violation, but then per the direction of Wing Lau Mr. Sweeney was directed to write the NOV.  Commissioner Guinnane stated that he could not figure out why Mr. Lau would direct someone to write a violation without looking at the property himself.  Commissioner Guinnane asked for an explanation from the Director or someone in the Building Department and said that furthermore he felt it was a bad call to issue the NOV. 

Director Chiu said that he did not have the knowledge to respond to Commissioner Guinnane’s question.  Vice-President Hood pointed out that Mr. Lau was in the audience.

President Santos produced some picture that he had taken of the property and said that the Department must recognize that in San Francisco there is a zero property line condition in quite a few buildings and neighbors need to be able to coexist and share property lines.  President Santos said that he thought that some property owners were using the Department to vent their anger towards their neighbors and thought that by bringing the issue to the Commission somehow the Commission could magically resolve their problems.  President Santos said that there was a zero property line between these properties and there was some flashing that could conceivably bond the two buildings and said that he could find hundreds of examples of that condition.  Vice-President Hood asked if someone could tell her what the problem was because she could not tell from the photographs.

Mr. Wing Lau said that he understood that this was a very tough call because the person who filed the complaint came to his office several times and he tried to explain to that individual that this flashing was protection for both buildings for water protrusion.  Mr. Lau said that he wrote the NOV with no penalties and no permits required and stated that both parties would have to take the flashing out.  Mr. Lau said that four days before the Commissioners went out to the site he did go out to the site to take a look at the stairway that was replaced and said that there was only a ¼” or 1/8” gap between the buildings.  Commissioner Guinnane said that in looking at the pictures and the actual site Mr. Lau gave the NOV to the people at 786 – 35^th Avenue, but said that it was the people who filed the complaint who are actually in violation because they put the vinyl siding over 786 by 2 ½”.  Commissioner Guinnane said that he thought this was a bad call and said that it troubled him to see that it was per Mr. Lau’s instructions to cite the building.

Mr. Joe O’Donoghue of the Residential Builders said that prior to the creation of this Commission the aggrieved property owner who received a NOV would have no basis for an appeal and it would have gone through the bureaucracy.  Mr. O’Donoghue said that the property owner now had the right to come before the Commission to state their case.  Mr. O’Donoghue stated that Commissioner Guinnane was right in saying that by writing an NOV it gives victory to one party over the other and then in looking at the case it is obvious that the person asking for the NOV to be issued was the one in fact who was continuously harassing the neighbor upon whom the NOV was issued.  Mr. O’Donoghue said that he would suggest that in an instance where there are two hostile neighbors fighting each other and one has already gone though litigation to get some peace of mind, that this be the kind of a case that would be referred to the Commission.  Mr. O’Donoghue stated that the Commission is like a mediation group and the public would feel that they were treated fairly.  Mr. O’Donoghue said that he wanted to congratulate the Commission and the staff for coming to testify and admitting that perhaps a mistake was made.

Discussion and possible action regarding 224 Seacliff Drive.   Copy of letter dated April 26, 2004 to the BIC from Patrick Mulligan, Financial Secretary of the United Brotherhood of Carpenters and Joiners of America, Local Union 22 regarding this property.

Mr. Lou Brugnara said that he was the owner of the property and stated that this letter is based on hearsay and inaccuracies.    Mr. Brugnara said that in the real business world this letter would open up a world of problems with litigation and misrepresentations.  Mr. Brugnara said that the letter stated that the National Parks Service issued a cease and desist order to a local Contractor; the Contractor was MH construction who were the Contractors for the San Francisco Airport, the San Francisco Zoo, PGE along Geary Street and the Chinatown Garage.  Mr. Brugnara said that this was a well-respected municipal Contractor that he hired because of severe problems with the retaining walls that were built in 1929 that were disintegrating.  Mr. Brugnara stated that this Contractor has experience in Engineering and architecture as well.  Mr. Brugnara said that there was never a cease and desist order issued, but there was a letter saying that if he was working on park property he should cease and desist, but he was never on their property.  Mr. Brugnara said that he was replacing an existing retaining wall and said that he was 20 feet back from the beach.  Mr. Brugnara said that he was more concerned about the individual who wrote this letter causing both the Commission and himself to waste valuable time.  Mr. Brugnara thanked the Commission.

Commissioner Guinnane asked Director Chiu if the Department had issued a NOV.  Director Chiu said that there were permits issued to repair or replace the stairs to the backyard and according to DBI records there were a couple of complaints received regarding this work and as a result an Inspector was sent out and the Department issued a NOV on April 8, 2004 and again on April 19, 2004.  Director Chiu said that there was an anonymous complaint and the Department received correspondence from the National Park Service.  Director Chiu said that on the April 19^th NOV along with the concerns of the National Park Service, the NOV cited the property owner for ignoring the Department’s first NOV.  Director Chiu said that NOV written by Inspector Joe Duffy was for undervalue of the permit because the permit was issued with the valuation being $21,000 and the Department’s estimation was that the work was valued at over $100,000.  Director Chiu said that a certain portion of the wall was poured without an inspection.  President Santos asked if there was a special inspection team on board.  Director Chiu said he was not sure, but regardless this would not exempt them from calling for an inspection by DBI staff. 

Vice-President Hood said that it seems to her that this is an appeal of the Notice of Violation and that should go to the Abatement Appeals Board.  Commissioner Guinnane said that this had not gone that far yet and this item was just to get the facts.  Commissioner Guinnane asked if originally were there walls and stairs going down to the beach or was this new construction.  Director Chiu said that the permit states that the owner was replacing existing construction.  Commissioner Guinnane suggested going on a site visit with President Santos.  Mr. Brugnara said that he did believe that the valuation should be corrected and said that the Contractor either had addressed or is addressing that issue.  Mr. Brugnara said that modifications were made according to Mr. Duffy and Mr. Sweeney’s recommendations to put in additional columns with rebar and steel.   President Santos said that he and Commissioner Guinnane would visit the site.  Mr. Brugnara said that he spoke with Mr. Sweeney and said that the medallion markers for the survey are out there and basically this letter came in from the Parks Department so the Building Department did the conservative thing by having the job stopped.  Mr. Brugnara said that the only pour that occurred was for six or seven stairs that was scheduled a week and a half ahead and they had a complete inspection and photographs by the Engineer.  Commissioner Guinnane asked why the Building Inspector wasn’t called for an inspection on those stairs.  Mr. Brugnara said that he was not in San Francisco at the time and Matthew Huey’s foreman was out there because they have multiple jobs going in the area and there was some miscommunication between the foreman and Matthew Huey. Mr. Brugnara said that the job was stopped and nothing has been done out there, but it is basically out there and there are remnants of the original walls.  President Santos asked for Inspector Sweeney to make some comments.

Mr. Sweeney stated that the Department received phone calls from the National Park Service requesting DBI to go out and stop the job until they could verify that the stairs were in the right location.  Mr. Sweeney said that the District Inspector went out the next day and asked that they please hold up on the pour until the required permit was obtained from the BCDC.  Mr. Sweeney said that DBI has not heard anything back from the Bay Conservation Development Corp (BCDC). Mr. Sweeney said that the following day when Mr. Duffy was driving by he noticed the concrete truck driving away so he stopped and noticed that they had poured.  Mr. Sweeney said that the Department’s main issue is that they asked the Contractor to stop and he didn’t and they poured without inspection.  President Santos asked if there was any urgency to do this pour.  Mr. Sweeney said he did not believe so as this is just a stairs leading to the beach.  Commissioner Fillon asked if Mr. Sweeney had seen the drawings to determine if this job is encroaching into the National Parks property.  Mr. Sweeney said he did not know for sure, as this was a courtesy to the Parks Department.  Commissioner Fillon said this should be an easy thing to determine.

Mr. Matthew Huey, the Contractor on the job, said that he did call for an inspection and a special inspection from the Engineer.  Mr. Huey said that he got a call from his superintendent telling him that the inspection had been approved and this was probably the special inspection so he did not cancel the pour.  Mr. Huey said that he did not get any cease and desist until the day after the pour and he was instructed by the owner to go ahead and proceed because he felt that he was within his property lines.  Mr. Huey said that there is a cliff hanging about five or six feet with nothing underneath and it was pointed out to them by Building Inspection that they had to do something about it.  Mr. Huey stated that he called the Engineer and put a column up there, but there is still stuff sloughing off the mountain that needs to be retained.  Mr. Huey said that the owner is aware of this.  President Santos asked if the stairs were associated with this emergency work.  Mr. Huey said that the stairs become part of the retaining wall and access and stated that there are some remnants of the old structure.  President Santos said that he and Commissioner Guinnane would go out with Inspector Sweeney to the site.  Vice-President Hood said that the National Parks should have a representative there too so they can see where the markers are. 

Mr. Joe O’Donoghue of the Residential Builders said he had a couple of caveats regarding the letter.  Mr. O’Donoghue said that he found it rather, but not surprising, arrogant that the Carpenters would send in a letter making allegations and looking for action from this Commission.  Mr. O’Donoghue said that a NOV would impact this Contractor.  Mr. O’Donoghue stated that he knew nothing about this Contractor or this job, but knew the environment in which the construction industry is operating said and they are under attack generally from the Carpenters, the District Council of Carpenters, who are not members of the AFL-CIO.  Mr. O’Donoghue stated if they write a letter asking for action and then do not appear to respond for questions they should be told that they couldn’t have it both ways.  Mr. O’Donoghue said that the question was raised that the owner was in violation and needed to get another permit from the State bureaucracy that controls the ocean area.  Mr. O’Donoghue said that the fact is, if the stairs is under repair they don’t necessarily go through that process because they are not putting in a new encroachment onto the ocean so they don’t have to go to BCDC; it is a technical requirement at best.  Mr. O’Donoghue said that this is the kind of allusion that DBI issues a NOV based on something that really is not a requirement.  Mr. O’Donoghue said that he did not know whether this Contractor was union or non-union, but it seemed to him that it is a union, non-union issue.  Mr. O’Donoghue said that this issue came up with one of the RBA Contractors recently at the Planning Commission when the carpenters came out in mass to protest a permit request to build some units and both the union and non-union advocates on the Commission berated the carpenters and told them that they can’t use Commissions as an organizing tool for their process.  Mr. O’Donoghue said that the RBA has dealt with these kinds of allegations in the past and have won only because they are an organized group, but said that he could see how a Contractor could get sandbagged because they are not familiar with the process.  Mr. O’Donoghue said that the Building Inspectors are members of Local 22 so there is an immediate conflict here so for that reason Inspectors have to be than judicious, just like OSHA are, when they get a complaint from the Carpenter’s Union to make sure that they are totally fair.

Discussion and possible action regarding 425 Junipero Serra Blvd. and update on the Board of Permit Appeals hearing.  [Commissioner Guinnane]

Commissioner Guinnane asked that this item be continued because at the Board of Permit Appeals this item was held over until June 12, 2004 so it would not be appropriate to discuss this matter until the actual ruling comes down.

9.

Discussion and possible action regarding 641 – 27^th Avenue and update on the Board of   Permit Appeals hearing. [Commissioner Guinnane]

Commissioner Guinnane reported that this hearing was held and the vote was 3 to 2 upholding the Building Department.  Commissioner Guinnane said Supervisor McGoldrick spoke on this item.  Commissioner Guinnane stated that a couple of the Commissioners had a problem with the actual law and the way the unlawful demolition is written because basically it is a five-year ban with a $5,000 fee against the Contractor and $1,000 fee against the owner.  Commissioner Guinnane said that the owner was trying to broker a deal to reduce the penalty down to one-year and change the fine to $10,000 instead of $5,000, but once a case is appealed to the Board of Permit Appeals the Department of Building Inspection does not have any jurisdiction of any kind.

10.

Discussion and possible action regarding the Commission’s request to review projects submitted by Project Sponsor James Li in the past twenty-four months.

Deputy Director William Wong asked the Commissioners to refer to a document in their meeting package regarding this item.  Mr. Wong said that the Commission has heard about this issue at three previous meetings and had asked the Department to come back with various reports.  Mr. Wong said that one report was to go back over the past twelve to twenty-four months on all projects by this particular Project Sponsor to see if their was a pattern similar to the project in question at 4109 Irving Street with respect to the foundation detail.  Mr. Wong said that the Department was asked to check on another project on 27^th Avenue to see if it had a similar situation and the Department was asked to look at the overall operating procedures in the Plan Check Division to improve the review of these foundation details in the future.  Mr. Wong stated the Commission was recommending that the Project Sponsor submit an application for a new building permit and a demolition permit to replace the alteration permit on 4109 Irving that is currently in review at this time.

Mr. Wong said that the Department went back five years on projects submitted by this Project Sponsor.  Mr. Wong stated that the list provided 235 permit applications that were submitted by this Engineer, which included 150 different properties.  Mr. Wong said that he and his staff looked at the projects that were of interest to this Commission specifically those that had to do with vertical additions that would affect the foundation details.  Mr. Wong said that the Department looked in detail at 14 projects and his Engineer came back with the finding that the one on Irving Street was the only one with substandard detail.  Mr. Wong said that the other ones were either new foundations or were properly designed so the Department believed this to be an isolated incident.  Mr. Wong said that with 27^th Avenue staff found that the plans did not contain a similar detail and had a good foundation.  Mr. Wong said that regarding the changes to operating procedures he referred to Exhibit B and stated that the procedures were revised to have Engineering staff look at vertical additions more carefully and are requiring additional documentation.  Mr. Wong stated that the Department would not accept anything marked “field verified”, but wanted the Engineer to verify the condition.  Mr. Wong said that with respect to the filing of the new permit application, staff spoke with the Project Sponsor and they are in the process of replacing that alteration permit with a new construction permit and a demolition permit.  Mr. Wong said that the Project Sponsor was unable to submit that because City Planning requires a soundness report, which would take time to acquire.  President Santos asked if the Project Sponsor was starting the process by finally filing a permit and submitting a new set of plans. Mr. Wong said that the Engineer informed him that this is what was going to happen. Mr. Wong said that on the alteration permit, the Department had stopped all work on the project. 

Commissioner Guinnane asked how much of the house at 4109 Irving Street was gone, percentage wise right now.  Mr. Wong said that originally the Project Sponsor came in and the removal was for 45% so the Department issued the permit; then they came in with a revision after the correction notice and it was more than 50%, but at the time the Inspector looked at the job it was closer to over 80%.  Commissioner Guinnane asked why this job would not qualify as an unlawful demolition and what makes this one different to go through the unsoundness process if that much of the house is gone.  Mr. Wong said that was certainly a call that the Building Inspector’s division could do if a Notice of Violation was issued and if it was carried through the abatement process.  Mr. Wong stated that his instruction at the last meeting was that the Commission wanted the Project Sponsor to go through this new permit application process.  Commissioner Guinnane said that he did not realize that so much of the house was gone and if that is the case then basically the Department has no alternative but to go through the hearing process.

Director Chiu said that he did not believe that the existing structure the way it is now is 80% gone, but said that the plans that they proposed to do would allow them to eliminate 80%.  Commissioner Guinnane said that on the third plan that came in versus the first or second one, the Project Sponsor moved the numbers with the actual square footage of the outside walls versus the inside walls.  Commissioner Guinnane stated that they moved 300’.  Commissioner Guinnane said that the first one came in at around 46%, the second one at 64% and the third one came in taking away 94.5%.  Commissioner Guinnane asked where the Department was at between the second and third permits.  Mr. Wong said that the first one came in at 46%, the revision came in at 64% and his understanding was that the Project Sponsor did not exceed the scope of the work at that time, but found out that there was more dry rot and left everything in place; then they wanted to submit a revision showing that they wanted to tear down additional work.  Mr. Wong said that he did not believe that there was a Notice of Violation issued against this property right now.  Commissioner Guinnane said that he wanted the Department to look at an unlawful demolition on this property and said that he wanted to move on to some of the other issues regarding this.

Commissioner Guinnane said that Hanson Tom came before this Commission a while back and talked about 4109 Irving being an isolated incident.  Commissioner Guinnane said that Mr. Tom was not present and said that he did not want to put Mr. Wong or the Department on the spot, but asked if that was Mr. Wong’s position today.  Mr. Wong said that when Mr. Tom responded to the Commission’s inquiry he believed that it was an isolated incident, but the Department had to go back and look at these projects, which is what has been done now.  Commissioner Guinnane asked if now that the Department has gone back and looked at all of these projects would that be Mr. Wong’s position today that this was a one-time incident.  Mr. Wong stated that he had two supervising Engineers look at these projects and did a random sampling of 14 projects out of 150 properties that were doing vertical additions and certainly the Department could look at more.  Commissioner Guinnane said he was just asking if it was Mr. Wong’s position that based on what had been done to date based on information from DBI employees that this was an isolated case; was that the position of the Department today.  Mr. Wong said that the Department only reviewed the plans and they looked pretty good, but things could happen during construction.  Commissioner Guinnane said that he asked Mr. Wong to look at the structural details on the foundation and that was the whole problem.  Commissioner Guinnane asked Mr. Wong if he reviewed the structural plans on these jobs that were submitted.  Mr. Wong said that he did not review them personally because he is not an Engineer, but one of his employees reviewed them and it was his opinion that all of those projects conformed with the exception of 4109 Irving Street. 

Commissioner Guinnane referred to the list submitted by the Department.  Commissioner Guinnane referred to 271 – 17^th Avenue where two applications were submitted and asked Mr. Wong to explain what the applications were for.  Mr. Wong stated that there were four applications.  Commissioner Guinnane referred to two applications that were shown on the list in front of him and asked about application number 200306278178, which was for that project because it was not showing on the list.  Mr. Wong said that he received the list from MIS.  Commissioner Guinnane said that Mr. Wong made representation and said that he was going to clearly show that there were some problems in the Building Department where this Commission was getting false, misleading information to try and cover this thing up, as he did believe that there was a cover up here and said that he was going to demonstrate it right now.  Mr. Wong said that if there were four applications he could go back and check on each one of them, but stated that he was just working off of this list.  Commissioner Guinnane said that in looking at 271 – 17^th Avenue there was an alteration permit and that house was very close to being declared an unlawful demolition and the only thing that saved that from an unlawful demolition like 425 – 27^th Avenue was that the front wall that was there when it was braced, the bracing wasn’t quite adequate and the Fire Department came out one night and took down the front wall of the house, so that job escaped the unlawful demolition numbers.  Commissioner Guinnane said that if Mr. Wong were to go back and look at the drawing on the application he referred to the Department he would see a note that said “reinforced footings 24” wide as necessary” and that is doweling right in.  Commissioner Guinnane said this was a different Engineer than the one that signed off on 4109 Irving Street, so this is not an isolated incident; this is a big on-going pattern in the Building Department.  Commissioner Guinnane said that he felt that there was a cover up here.

Commissioner Guinnane asked about 578 – 24^th Avenue.   Mr. Wong said that was reviewed and said that he did not have the plans with him.  Commissioner Guinnane stated that he had reviewed the plans and it was the same thing, with the same note and a different Engineer again.  Commissioner Guinnane said that obviously what Mr. Wong was telling the Commission was not true and said he was not blaming Mr. Wong for it, but the facts being put forward are not true.  Commissioner Guinnane said that he had eight other addresses and said he would not get into them today, but stated that the Department should go back and look these addresses and look at the structural drawings because what Mr. Wong was representing here today was not true and said that Hanson Tom gave that same representation.  Commissioner Guinnane said that this was a big flaw in the Department on horizontal and vertical extensions.  Mr. Wong said they extracted the vertical extensions, but would be happy to go back and look at them in more detail.  Commissioner Guinnane said that it was very convenient that on 271 – 17^th Avenue the other application was left out.  Mr. Wong said he was not sure.  Commissioner Guinnane said that this was very suspicious because this was almost a brand new building.  Commissioner Guinnane said that he thought that there were people inside the Department that were trying to conceal things because this is an ongoing thing and is not isolated as has been maintained before this Commission.  Mr. Wong asked if Commissioner Guinnane would furnish the projects he was talking about so the Department could check on them.  Commissioner Guinnane said that he wanted to check what the Department would come back with against his list. 

Vice-President Hood asked if Mr. Wong could prepare a list of all of the addresses Commissioner Guinnane had in a table form and indicate the size of the expansions, the foundation detail and whether or not it met the Code, and then who was the submitting Engineer and who was the plan checker.  Mr. Wong said he would be happy to do that.

Commissioner Guinnane, said through the Chair, in response to Vice-President Hood’s request he was not giving the addresses because he wanted the Department to come back with an updated list and then he would look at the list being supplied by the Department and compare it with his list to see if they are consistent.  Commissioner Guinnane said that right how they are not consistent concerning the two addresses that he just gave and said that he would encourage pulling the structural drawings on the two as it would show the same detail on both of them.  Vice-President Hood asked if Commissioner Guinnane was asking the Department to look through all of their permits to find out how many of them had improper structural plans.  Commissioner Guinnane said that the Department had come up with four pages of jobs and all they had to do was to go back and look at the horizontal or vertical jobs, check the detail and come back and tell him that it was an isolated incident.  Commissioner Guinnane said that when the Department would come back with a list he would look at his list and give the addresses of the projects that don’t conform.  Mr. Wong said that he would work with the Inspection Division.  Commissioner Guinnane said he wanted the Department to look at the structural detail.  Commissioner Guinnane stated that whatever individual came up with the list that was presented today should be looked at because obviously what was presented today was not the truth.  Commissioner Guinnane said that he hated people to mislead him or lie to him.  Mr. Wong said that he would have to check the 17^th Avenue address.

Mr. Joe O’Donoghue of the Residential Builders said that he believed that Hanson Tom who is in charge of the Plan Check Division should have been present to testify because he is the one who is responsible for the implementation and the issuance of all of these permits.  Mr. O’Donoghue said he thought this was absolutely outrageous because Mr. Tom is the one who could have answered in detail Commissioner Guinnane’s questions.  Mr. O’Donoghue said that excuses would probably be given as to why he was not present, but said it was obvious that the Department did not want to put someone on the carpet when Commissioner Guinnane had more knowledge.  Mr. O’Donoghue stated that what was presented today by the Deputy Director was that a prima-facie case, an isolated case, and now the Department knows that it is not an isolated case.  Mr. O’Donoghue said that it was an isolated case in the sense that there is an isolated section of DBI that is engaging in what is bordering on illegal activity.  Mr. O’Donoghue said that he and Commissioner Guinnane have taken this to various authorities outside this Department and said that he had the facts and the facts are such that he is trying to preserve the loss of life.  Mr. O’Donoghue said that what has been approved going through that section of the Department are structures and foundations with new buildings that cannot stand on the foundations and in the event of an earthquake and people are in those buildings, those buildings are going to come down and deaths are going to result.  Mr. O’Donoghue said that is why the Commission should request that Hanson Tom be present because his division is approving unsafe structures and unsafe buildings.  Mr. O’Donoghue stated that contrary to what was said on inauguration day and in a pre-inauguration address that there is undue influence here, very little undue influence in the Department, but there is a small element and it will always happen from now into the future, activity that is bordering on criminal activity.  Mr. O’Donoghue stated that this Commission has done its job because over the years it has been continuously monitored and contrary to what the Chronicle has said activities, because the very nature of the Building Department approvals, all over the country and this City is no exception, is that people and scofflaws will violate and exceed the scope of the permits and will also do work without permit.  Mr. O’Donoghue stated this it is the Commission’s responsibility to monitor that activity and the Commission has done an excellent job because the Commission was structured with experts who know what they are doing and actually go out and investigate.  Mr. O’Donoghue said that the Commission should request Mr. Tom and other Engineers to be at the next meeting so the Commission does not get shucked and jived around.

Commissioner Guinnane said that he requested Mr. Tom to be at this meeting through the Commission Secretary and also left the podium to ask Mr. Wong where Mr. Tom was.  Mr. O’Donoghue said that Mr. Wong has been dragged into this and given misinformation and a lack of information to give a proper presentation.  Mr. O’Donoghue stated that he did not know if Mr. Wong was involved, but said that there is a red flag here that there is a cover up going on and said he has been on this for months.  Mr. O’Donoghue said that there is another reason he is concerned about this and would state that at public comment.

Mr. James Li said that he was very surprised that he was the only Design Professional that the Commission requested the Department do an investigation.  Mr. Li said that he felt that this Commission was singling him out.  Mr. Li said that recently he has been requested by Contractors to review projects done by other Design Professionals and stated that the designs are much worse and asked how come the Commission was not looking at those things, but only looking at him.  Commissioner Guinnane asked Mr. Li for those addresses and said he would look into them personally.  Commissioner Guinnane said that the Commission, nor himself, were singling out Mr. Li, but what started all of this was 4109 Irving Street because in looking at the foundation detail this came to his attention.  Mr. Li said that he believed that 4109 Irving Street was not an illegal demolition because the majority of the components are still there.  Mr. Li said that Commissioner Guinnane could go back to the job and look at the existing conditions; the building is one story only and the majority of exterior walls are still there and the ceiling is still there.  Mr. Li said that he did not understand why Commissioner Guinnane was still saying this was an illegal demolition and stated that a number of people had gone out to this site including Director Chiu, Ken Harrington, Ed Sweeney and other staff from DBI and none of them believe this is an illegal demolition.  Mr. Li said that Commissioner Guinnane was the only one that believed this was an illegal demolition and said he did not understand that.  Commissioner Guinnane said that when Mr. Li talks about individuals going out from the Department he believes that there is a big conspiracy in the Department to make this project at 4109 Irving move along.  Commissioner Guinnane asked Mr. Li about the old foundation on the property on the east and west sides and asked if Mr. Li x-rayed the walls to do a core sample.  Mr. Li stated that he did not.  Commissioner Guinnane asked how Mr. Li could show a detail that is going to hold a three-story building with doweling into the side of the walls and a spread footing.  Mr. Li said that he should look more carefully at those details, but this project was done by one of his staff.  Mr. Li said that he agreed that he should look more closely at those conditions, but said that he sees a lot of existing projects that are using existing foundations.  Mr. Li said that he recently looked at a project at 550 Monterey Blvd. that was adding a third story to a two-story building.  Mr. Li said that the foundation that was approved on the plans indicated to verify the existing foundation and there was no detail.  Mr. Li said there was no proper design and there are not enough shear walls holding that one up.

Mr. Li said that another example was 81 Rico Way in the Marina District.  Mr. Li said that the Project Sponsor was doing a vertical addition and again none of the existing foundation was touched.  Commissioner Guinnane said that this clearly shows that there is a problem in this Department as he thought that it was isolated to Mr. Li, but obviously it is widespread in this whole damn Department.  Mr. Li said that it could be.  Commissioner Guinnane said it sounded like it was all of the other Engineers too.  Mr. Li said that he was frustrated because he was the one singled out by this Commission. 

President Santos said that he was glad that Mr. Li referred to some other addresses because it would be important, in terms of actual detail that every particular project had specific requirements so it is difficult to generalize.  President Santos said that rather than engaging in globalizing this whole issue, his suggestion would be to first go back and analyze the specifics of these properties that would be similar in detail.  President Santos said that he was sure that Commissioner Guinnane’s intent was not to single anybody out.  Commissioner Guinnane said that was not his intent, but at the next Commission meeting those two addresses would be on the agenda.  Mr. Li said that he would be more than happy to answer any questions from the Commission.

Vice-President Hood said that on Mr. Li’s first project that came before the Commission there were such egregious problems that the Commission wondered if there were similar problems on his other projects and that is what led to this investigation.   Vice-President Hood said that the Commission wanted to know if there were problems with the project because of the way it was checked at DBI or because of the way it was designed, but said that the Commission was not just looking at Mr. Li.

Commissioner Guinnane asked how many employees Mr. Li had working for him.  Mr. Li said he had three employees.  Commissioner Guinnane asked if one employee works on foundations or does each employee work on entire projects and have separate jobs.  Mr. Li said that the employees are responsible for their own projects.  Commissioner Guinnane said that in looking at Mr. Li’s drawings on additions, all of the foundation detail is the same on all of the jobs.  Vice-President Hood asked if Mr. Li stamped all of the drawings.  Mr. Li said that he did.  Vice-President Hood said that Mr. Li is absolutely responsible for every line on the drawings and to say that his employee made a mistake is to say that Mr. Li made a mistake.  Mr. Li said that he understood that.  President Santos said that there is no such thing as a flawless set of structural drawings and there is no such thing as a flawless set of architectural drawings.  President Santos said that the consultants do their very best in most cases to insure that the documentation is as complete and comprehensive as they can and unfortunately there are cases where something will be missed.  President Santos stated that in most of those cases he was sure that those were unintentional elements.  Vice-President Hood said that she was sorry, but that was an outrageous thing for President Santos to say as a Structural Engineer that it is all right for people to make mistakes on their documents when they pertain to health, safety and welfare.  Vice-President Hood said that she worked for years with President Santos in his role as a Structural Engineer and knew for a fact that she checks them and doubles checks them to see how he is doing and said that President Santos tends to over design not under design.  Vice-President Hood said that she has had many clients protest about the cost of their foundations.  Vice-President Hood said that licensed professionals might make mistakes coordinating plumbing or something like that, but mistakes are not made as to whether or not the building will stand up in San Francisco.  President Santos said that he appreciated the constructive criticism and said it was a very good point.  President Santos said that his intention was to say that given the nature of the construction industry there might be some discrepancies in coordination, but Vice-President Hood was correct in her statements.  Vice-President Hood said that if there is a pattern in project after project that is not an oversight; that is a basic fundamental error.

Mr. Li said that there is another project on Florida Street between 23^rd and 24^th Streets that is a brand new building designed by some other Design Professional where he was asked to do a special inspection to look at the rebar and the shear wall.  Mr. Li said that the design was terrible because the roof framing was not even matching the architect’s drawings.  Mr. Li said that some of the shear wall was missing.  Commissioner Guinnane said that he wanted Mr. Li to call him to meet and said that he wanted to say that no one was singling him out because Mr. Li was not heard of until 4109 Irving Street.  Mr. Li said he was happy to hear that.

Mr. Ken Harrington of the Director’s Office said that he wanted to clear up one of Mr. Li’s statements.  Mr. Harrington said that he had been to 4109 Irving Street and said that he thought Mr. Li stated that Mr. Harrington had concluded that this was not an unlawful demolition.  Mr. Harrington said that he had not so concluded as he was waiting for the staff report with the calculations. 

At this time the Commission took a break from 10:50 a.m. to 11:05 a.m.

11.

Discussion and possible action regarding possible illegal work being performed without permits at 2454 Geary Blvd. [Commissioner Guinnane]

12.

Discussion and possible action regarding possible illegal work being performed without permits at 2173 Turk Street. [Commissioner Guinnane]

Commissioner Guinnane said that item #’s 11and 12 were being done by the same Project Sponsor and said that he and Commissioner Santos had gone out to these projects.  Commissioner Guinnane stated that he believed that there had been three Stop Work Orders posted on this property, but the work continues to move forward.  Commissioner Guinnane said that the entire A-frame roof had been raised up about 3’6” to create a huge upper floor of occupancy on the very top creating five floors of occupancy. Commissioner Guinnane said that the Contractor’s position is that the elevation of the roof attic has not been changed, but this can clearly be seen from the top of the brick walls where the roof was resting and now it has been pushed up; also, from the two sides on the west and east sides there is all new framing materials and plywood versus the old section so it clearly shows where the top floor has been moved up.  Commissioner Guinnane said that he had asked Inspector Sweeney to talk to the license board so that one of their Inspectors would take a look at this because he felt that the Department would be making a referral to the license board on this issue.  Commissioner Guinnane said that this individual seemed to be doing as he pleased and said that there was actually three or four more jobs that have been completed in the same manner.  Vice-President Hood asked who was that individual.  President Santos said that the Contractor was Dean Alec.  Commissioner Guinnane said that all of the outside walls were unreinforced brick walls.  Commissioner Guinnane said that this individual appears to do the work and then try to go and get the work legalized after the fact so he needs to be stopped.  Commissioner Guinnane said that he had been in contact with the City Attorney’s Office to file a Temporary Restraining Order (TRO) to accomplish that.  Vice-President Hood asked if this was a wood framed building with exterior brick walls of unreinforced masonry.  Commissioner Guinnane said that this one was, but said that you could not tell this from the outside.  Vice-President Hood said that it probably could not be a five-story building.  Commissioner Guinnane said that it could not according to the Code.  Vice-President Hood said that she did not think that anyone could extend the load on an existing unreinforced masonry wall without completely upgrading the entire wall.  President Santos said that the brick wall would either have to be removed or gunite would have to be added and reinforcement done. 

Mr. Dorian Sarris said that he was blessed with living next door to one of Mr. Alec’s projects and that project was 2173 Turk Street that has been ongoing for approximately three years.  Mr. Sarris said that he had notes from the Board of Appeals and said that the neighborhood was still waiting for items to be corrected.  Mr. Sarris stated that he lived at 2167 Turk directly next door.  Mr. Sarris said that in 2001 Mr. Alec bought a property consisting of two one-level units over an old basement with brick foundation.  Mr. Sarris said that this property had now been expanded to four levels without any neighborhood notification so a third level was added and the basement was finished.  Mr. Sarris reported that a new concrete foundation was added and said he was assuming that no core hole drillings were done, but said that he had no idea.  Mr. Sarris said that his request was that the foundation be inspected by an independent Engineer of the City’s choice to make sure it is accurate and correct.  Mr. Sarris said that the building was now over three levels so there are no sprinklers and said that he was sure that there was no shear wall added at that time.  Mr. Sarris said that there were vents on his property line directly next to his property from Mr. Alec’s furnaces and there were illegal two story stairs that were added with no shear wall and no firewall. Mr. Sarris said that he believed that there were three or four families living in that property right now due to the amount of garbage that is generated out in front, but said he was not sure how many people were living there.  Mr. Sarris stated that this project was originally submitted to the City as kitchen and bath remodels.  Mr. Sarris said that he made 35 to 40 phone calls to the Building Department and his tenant made more phone calls due to the amount of disturbance.  Mr. Sarris said that he was looking to get resolution and was not looking to hurt anybody, but said that he was concerned about an earthquake.  President Santos asked if Mr. Sarris received a 311 notification from Planning.  Mr. Sarris stated that he received no notification at all.  Mr. Sarris said that another property owner on Central that butts the property was threatened by Mr. Allen so he backed off and it was not a good situation.   

Commissioner Guinnane asked the Director where the breakdown was within the Department when the Commission hears about all of these phone calls and this person is allowed to do all this work and keep on going and then go from one project to another.  Mr. Sarris said that along with the phone calls he had actually written letters to Mr. Chiu and finally when he wrote a letter copying his Supervisor he finally got some response.  Mr. Sarris said that Duffy was out there several times and Mr. Duffy said that he did not see anything wrong.  Commissioner Guinnane asked if Mr. Sarris was referring to Inspector Duffy and asked what was the Inspector’s first name.  Mr. Sarris answered that the first name was Donald.  Vice-President Hood asked if there was an expansion of the building next door to Mr. Sarris.  Mr. Sarris said that Mr. Alec added a level below because there was a basement with a brick foundation barely standing.  Mr. Sarris said that the property was owned by a lovely lesbian couple for several years and it was pretty much untouched, but then it was sold and when they moved the bottom level was then developed by pouring a foundation.  Mr. Sarris said that this foundation was poured with a permit showing that Mr. Alec was putting in a kitchen and bath.  Commissioner Guinnane asked how many conversations Mr. Sarris had with Inspector Duffy personally and on the phone.  Mr. Sarris said it was at least a dozen and said that he met Mr. Duffy out there finally after many, many phone calls and letters.  Commissioner Guinnane asked if Mr. Sarris pointed out the issues to Inspector Duffy where he couldn’t find any problems. Mr. Sarris said he did so many times and said that he asked why this property had four doorbells in the front when there are only two units.  Mr. Sarris said that he forgot to mention that there were three decks that were added completely without permits and said that he pointed these out to the Inspector.  Vice-President Hood asked if Mr. Sarris called this information into the City about the decks.  Mr. Sarris said that he did.  Vice-President Hood asked if nothing happened until Mr. Sarris called his Supervisor.  Mr. Sarris said that absolutely nothing happened until then.  Vice-President Hood thanked Mr. Sarris for coming before the Commission and asked if he had copies of the letters that he wrote to the Department.  Mr. Sarris said that he had a copy of a letter to Mr. Arnold Chin that was dated February 17, 2003.  Vice-President Hood said that Mr. Chin was with the Board of Permit Appeals and asked if Mr. Sarris had any copies of his letters to the Building Inspection Department.  Vice-President Hood asked if Director Chiu could provide copies of those letters to the Commission.

Mr. Steven O’Reilly said that he lived at 2167 Turk Street and said that he could back up everything that Mr. Sarris had said.  Mr. O’Reilly said that he too had made numerous phone calls to the Building Department and called the Public Health Department.  Commissioner Guinnane asked whom Mr. O’Reilly contacted in the Building Department.  Mr. O’Reilly said that he contacted Mr. Duffy and Mr. Duffy did return a couple of his calls.  Mr. O’Reilly stated that he had last contacted Mr. Duffy earlier in the year and there was obviously more work going on in the building so he called and Mr. Duffy said that he came by and personally went into the building and the owner was just putting up some drywall.  Mr. O’Reilly said that he was told that there was no work going on that required a permit.  Commissioner Guinnane asked Mr. O’Reilly if Inspector Duffy told him that there was no permit required for putting up drywall or another wall. Mr. O’Reilly said that was the implication.  Commissioner Guinnane asked if Mr. O’Reilly ever talked to a Senior Inspector, a Deputy Director or Director Frank Chiu.  Mr. O’Reilly said he had not; he talked strictly with the Inspector.

Leo McFadden of the Code Enforcement Division said that this was a typical Dean Alec case as the Department receives a complaint and the District Inspector goes out and Mr. Alec then follows up with a permit application to comply with the violation and usually there is a series of violations and a series of permits to address them.  Inspector McFadden said that in this case Mr. Alec has six permits issued for this property and started with the same MO as on Geary Blvd. with the reframing of the roof and repairing of the foundation and over-the-counter remodel permits.  Mr. McFadden said that in this case, he begged to differ with the speaker, but the Department followed up with this case and had an Order of Abatement issued in August 2002; the permits were then suspended a couple of months later and were at the Board of Appeals nine months after that.  Vice-President Hood asked if when the decks were added to the back if that permit went through the City Planning Department.  Mr. McFadden stated that there were a couple of permits with City Planning approval, but the decks were not part of a complaint; the decks were written in a report of violations by him.  Mr. McFadden said that the decks were shown on the plans as previously existing decks, but they were never cited until he cited them in a report of violations.  Vice-President Hood said that when the permit was submitted to build those decks that should have triggered notification.  Mr. McFadden said that there were no permits to build the decks.  Commissioner Guinnane said that all of this discussion was on item #12 and the Commission was still discussing item #11.  Commissioner Guinnane said that the decks were on Turk Street.  Vice-President Hood asked if the only connection was the builder, Mr. Alec.  Commissioner Guinnane said that was correct along with the same pattern of pushing up the roof and adding another floor of occupancy.  Vice-President Hood asked if it was the same Inspector.

Inspector Ed Sweeney said that the Building Inspector on Geary Street was very prompt and had written three Notices of Violation in the past six months.  Vice-President Hood asked if when a neighbor calls in about a property if the Inspectors kept a note of that for the file or kept any record of that concern.  Mr. Sweeney said that all complaints are in the computer and come through the Seniors.  Vice-President Hood asked if the Commission could get a copy of that to see what the Inspector’s response was.  Mr. Sweeney said that he did not know about Turk Street.  Vice-President Hood said that she was talking about Geary and understood that Mr. Sweeney would have to research this.  Mr. Sweeney said that he thought that Mr. Duffy did a very good job with Geary Street and said that Mr. Duffy was reporting to him all along as to what his next step was going to be.  Mr. Sweeney said that on this project there were twenty permits and that is Mr. Alec’s MO; he is very sophisticated and it is difficult to pen him down.  Commissioner Guinnane said that if Mr. Duffy told Mr. Sweeney about this Project Sponsor’s MO and knew exactly what he was going to do on Geary Blvd. based on Turk Street, why wasn’t he stopped sooner and why didn’t the Department bring in the City Attorney when Mr. Alec was starting to raise the roof.  Mr. Sweeney said that there was a switch in Inspectors and Mr. O’Riordan is now the Inspector out there.  Commissioner Guinnane asked how a switch in Inspectors would stop the enforcement out there because if there was a problem job one Inspector should inform the new Inspector.  Mr. Sweeney said that did occur, but he caught Mr. Alec doing the job on a Saturday.  Vice-President Hood asked if after Mr. Alec was caught raising the roof if that permit went back to City Planning. Mr. Sweeney said that right now the Department was having a terrible time trying to get Mr. Alec to stop and stated that he had called the license board.  Vice-President Hood said that when somebody won’t stop work the Department has to go to the City Attorney and get a court order to stop it.  Mr. Sweeney said that the City Attorney’s Office was still in the process of getting a TRO.  Mr. Sweeney said that the City Attorney’s Office was more interested in filing a complaint to bring it before a judge to get some sanctions against Mr. Alec to help the Department, as the Department spends a lot of time on this particular individual.  Vice-President Hood said that these are more examples of serial permitting.  Mr. Sweeney said that Mr. Alec knows the system and how to get around it.  Vice-President Hood asked if Mr. Alec was a licensed professional.  Mr. Sweeney said that he is a Contractor who uses different professionals and said that Mr. Alec has permits on file to convert the attic, but said that he did not think that actually reflected the work done there.  Vice-President Hood said that if other professionals are signing documentation about the work being done and it is not accurate the Department could go after those professional’s licenses.  Mr. Sweeney said that Mr. Alec was trying to say that the five-story building was only four with a mezzanine.  President Santos said that it appears that the Commission has been discussing items 11 and 12. 

Mr. Joe O’Donoghue said that he thought it was time for this Commission to form a taskforce because the minority of egregious scofflaws has been identified out there with Contractors who are doing the serial permitting and obviating the system.  Mr. O’Donoghue said he did not want all of the good people in the industry who comply with the rules and regulations affected by draconian legislation that might be enacted that would impact the productivity of these good people.  Mr. O’Donoghue said that the taskforce should comprise of a representative from the District Attorney’s Office, one from the City Attorney’s Office, two or three from the Commission and people from the industry along with citizens with the purpose being to drive these people out of business, including the professionals who file plans on their behalf.  Mr. O’Donoghue said that the fact that someone can come in and get serial permits and in the end break all the laws that to him is not what the Department has been saying is complying with the law, that is a direct demonstration of intention to violate that law.  Mr. O’Donoghue stated that if the end result is that these people have done things in violation of the law in the total even though it was done in compliance though the law there is the prima-facie case that the intention was to break the law.  Mr. O’Donoghue said that the Department needs the District Attorney’s Office to take a look at this and said that in this instance he totally disagrees with the Director and has in the past that even if a project is done with serially permitting, but in the end it was all done wrong and 99% of the building is demolished, therefore they broke the law.  Mr. O’Donoghue said that these people are just using procedures within the law to violate the law and the conclusion is what matters.  Mr. O’Donoghue said that the Department needs to get more creative to stop these people and said that he thought that the Department could move to close these people down. 

Vice-President Hood said that she thought the Commission could give the Department clearer direction on work done after a permit has been issued because people can use this in a very bad way.  Vice-President Hood said that she thought that one of the things that should be looked into on a Committee would be to look into ways, whether it be through guidelines in Plan Checking or an Administrative Bulletin, that can send a message out to every Plan Checker that the moment one of these red flags come up that implies a serial permit that they go into some other system and because it is written down in advance people could do something about it.  Vice-President Hood said this would not leave it up to the individual Plan Checker to deal with these people who are very clever and very experienced in how to work the system.  Commissioner Fillon said that one of the most powerful things that could be done is to identify these people and go after them.  Commissioner Guinnane said that these projects had been referred over to the City Attorney.

Deputy Director Jim Hutchinson said that the Department clearly sees from what has been said at this meeting that a better job has to be done in checking serial permits.  Mr. Hutchinson said that the counter Inspector could query the address to see if there were other permits taken out on the property.  Mr. Hutchinson stated that there was an Order of Abatement on Turk Street and it had been referred to the City Attorney, which was one of the good things about the Litigation Committee and at the last Litigation Committee the Committee asked the City Attorney for a TRO on Geary.  Mr. Hutchinson said that the Department was taking the appropriate steps and it would be pursued at the Litigation Committee.  Mr. Hutchinson said that the Department was checking to see if there were other projects out there with the same Project Sponsor.  Vice-President Hood asked if the Commission could get a copy of Mr. Alec’s projects and the permit history on them.  Commissioner D’Anne asked if these were rental properties and said that the Department could contact the Health Department to vacate these properties if they were not up to Code.  Vice-President Hood said that if there was a problem with framing on the top floor the entire building could be condemned.  Mr. Hutchinson said that Mr. Sweeney informed him that the Department was looking into seven projects regarding this particular individual and staff was in the process of doing an investigation.

Commissioner Brown said that he agreed with other Commissioners who have said that there needs to be some kind of flag put on projects by these particular individuals who are doing serial permitting.  Commissioner Brown stated that there are people out there taking advantage of the Department and the Department needs to respond to that very directly.  Commissioner Brown said that he knew that there was a lot of procedural protocol for identifying when something on a permit application doesn’t look right and having Inspectors and Engineers go out and identify ways that applications could be submitted and work could be better performed, but said that he thought that also there needs to be some sort of protocol for identifying bad actors almost immediately and giving special attention to any projects in the future that they submit.  Deputy Director Hutchinson said that the Department was hearing this loud and clear. 

Director Chiu said that this was frustrating for the neighbors and the staff, but the current process of a penalty of two times the permit does not work because people are willing to pay that fee.  Director Chiu said that he agreed with Mr. O’Donoghue that the Department needed to find a policy or change some rules so those bad actors that continually abuse the system could be stopped.  Director Chiu said that people were even willing to pay the nine times penalty so fines were not working.  Vice-President Hood said that there might be a variety of things that could be done such as in the case of a rental where the tenants would have to move and the owner would have to pay to find them other places to live.  Director Chiu said that at a future meeting the Commission could create a committee to work with staff and others to find other ways to penalize these people.  Vice-President Hood said that it needs to be stopped before it starts because if the playing field doesn’t allow this kind of thing then the Department is not just catching them as they come through because the Plan Checkers need to look at so many permits. 

Mr. O’Reilly said that he just wanted to say that he did not know how long this was going to take, but if there was an earthquake next week and if this property topples onto his building he wondered who in this room was going to be responsible.  Commissioner Fillon said that he thought it was a very good idea to form a taskforce to meet on these types of cases and have it involve the City Attorney’s Office and maybe three members of the Commission.  Commissioner Fillon said that the Commission was spending a lot of time on these types of issues at the meetings and there are a lot of other items coming up including the Abatement Appeals.  Commissioner Guinnane said that there are a lot of Committees, but the Litigation Committee covers what is being suggested.  Commissioner Fillon said that Litigation would be part of it, but this is more like enforcement.  Commissioner Guinnane asked what authority a taskforce would have.  Commissioner Fillon said that it would involve site visits and direct complaints from the public and the taskforce would have access to staff to pull permits and research existing conditions and property lines.  Commissioner Guinnane asked how often the taskforce would meet and who would be on it.  Commissioner Guinnane said he would be willing to do it as did Vice-President Hood.  Commissioner Fillon said that it would be important that the members have knowledge of the Code and construction practices.  Commissioner Fillon stated that he did not think it would be a bad idea to have somebody from Planning because people are using this serial permitting to get around Planning constraints.  Vice-President Hood said that she did not want it to bog down and not get anything accomplished.  Vice-President Hood said that she would suggest coming up with the program and then running it by Planning before taking it to the public. Commissioner Guinnane asked that the meeting move on.  Commissioner Fillon said that the Commission has been going after this issue piecemeal in the meetings and now there needs to be a Committee that is going to look at this in a systematic way that is fair.

Mr. O’Donoghue said that this would set up a protocol and a procedure exactly so the punishments would be there and then with four or five phone calls the members could come in and it could be done very rapidly.  Mr. O’Donoghue said that this would show anyone in the future that is going to try this serial permitting that it is not going to happen because the protocol would be in order.

13.

Update on City Attorney’s Presentation held on Monday, May 3, 2004 regarding the Sunshine Ordinance. [Commissioner Guinnane]

Commissioner Guinnane said that this was a very informative meeting and well worth the two hours because it informed Commissioners as to what a Commission could do and their authority, in reference to gifts, travel, entertainment and also talked about the Form 700 Disclosure.  Vice-President Hood said that many Commissioners attended and said it was a requirement. 

Mr. O’Donoghue said that the City Attorney went into an item that he discussed at a past meeting that there is absolutely no abridgement on the right of free speech.  Mr. O’Donoghue said that if someone is going to sit on a Commission, just as he is an Advocate on behalf of the construction industry, he takes the criticism and if he can’t take it he should resign; if the Commissioners can’t take it they should resign.  Mr. O’Donoghue said that this is not to say that someone can come in and holler “fire” in a theater, but questions about qualifications and how someone got on the Commission and their behavior on the Commission in terms of policy are totally within the protected level. 

14.

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.

a.




b.

Copy of letter dated March 23, 2004 from Mr. Larry Mazzola, Bus. Mngr. & Fin. Secty-Treasurer of the United Association of Journeymen and Apprentices of the Plumbing and Pipe Fitting Industry Local Union No. 38 to Mr. J. K. Dineen of the Examiner regarding Examiner article titled “Plumbers lose their wrenches” which was printed in the Independent.  Article referred to hotel at 12^th & Market Street.
Letter dated May 3, 2004 from Director Noriaki Hirasuna, Controller’s Audits Division to Building Inspection Commission President Rodrigo Santos regarding Responses to the Recommendations of the 2002-03 Civil Grand Jury.

Vice-President Hood asked about item 14b.  Assistant Director Lee said that this was about the Grand Jury report, which was submitted during her absence.  Commissioner Marks said that the Department did issue a press release shortly after the Grand Jury report was released and asked if the Commission could get a copy of the response to the Controller.

Mr. O’Donoghue said that he wanted to respond to Mr. Mazzola’s criticism of Mr. Roy Guinnane on the Civic Center Hotel and said that the Building Trades Council totally opposed the appointment of Commissioner Guinnane; in fact they went bananas when they heard he was going on the Commission.  Mr. O’Donoghue said that Mr. Stanley Smith was Secretary General at the time of the Building Trades and the reason was that they feared Mr. Guinnane as an independent spokesperson and this was one of the reasons he was considered.  Mr. O’Donoghue said that Commissioner Guinnane had the distinction of not only having sued the Zoning Director, but also the City Attorney’s Office and whoever else was involved so he showed that he had the courage of his convictions.  Mr. O’Donoghue said that he might say that the issue of the  J.K. Dineen article was that if you allowed the demolition of the Sangiacmo property on 11^th and Market,  Mazzola already, through the Plumber’s Union, had the permit in to demolish the Civic Center Hotel, which would be another additional 200 SRO units.  Mr. O’Donoghue said this letter is not really accurate and said that Roy Guinnane was not going to be invited down to Mr. Mazzola’s house in Burlingame anytime soon.

15.

Review and approval of the minutes of the April 19, 2004 meeting.

Vice-President Hood made a motion, seconded by President Santos that the minutes be   approved.  The motion carried unanimously.

RESOLUTION NO. BIC 026-004

SUMMARY OF REQUESTS BY COMMISSIONERS

Director Chiu to report back any changes to the budget as they occur.

Page 3

Changes are to be made to the 2001 Controller’s Management Audit and brought back to the Commission. – Vice-President Hood and Commissioner Marks

Pages 5 – 7

Item #8 regarding 425 Junipero Serra was continued. – Commissioner Guinnane

Page 11

Future agenda item to form a taskforce regarding serial permitting. – Vice-President Hood and Commissioner Fillon

Pages 12 - 18

Copy of DBI’s response to the Civil Grand Jury – Commission Marks

Page 25

Future agenda item regarding Rules of Behavior for the BIC as requested by the Ethics Commission. – Vice-President Hood

Page 25