[Build] Fwd: inspection warning?

daravinne daravinne at gmail.com
Fri Jun 27 18:16:44 UTC 2014


correct me if i'm wrong but the name of the current building owner should
be a matter of public record, no? i am looking now but maybe someone can
find it faster than me


On Fri, Jun 27, 2014 at 10:47 AM, Shannon Lee <shannon at scatter.com> wrote:

> +1 to "remove the kitchen."
>
> Although there was no permit obtained, the walls were (originally) built
> to code and should pass inspection; it might not be a terrible idea to have
> someone with knowledge of the inspection process have a look. "Originally"
> in this case means "before there were windows put into various walls."
>
> I know I've been out of the loop, but has the building been sold? Robert
> Noel is not the name of the owners we rented from originally. If the
> building has been sold and this inspection thing is phase one of a plan to
> get us to move out so he can put condos or offices or something in, it
> might suggest a different course of action.
>
> --S
>
>
> On Fri, Jun 27, 2014 at 3:38 AM, Ben Kochie <ben at nerp.net> wrote:
>
>> Yay! Remove the kitchen!
>>
>>
>> On June 27, 2014 10:34:04 AM CEST, Naomi Most <pnaomi at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> This answers a LOT of questions.
>>>
>>>
>>> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
>>> From: *Tim Pearson* <tim at electriccitysf.com>
>>> Date: Thursday, June 26, 2014
>>> Subject: inspection warning?
>>> To: Naomi Most <naomi at nthmost.com>
>>> Cc: Neil Maclean <neil at warmcove.com>, Mitch Altman <
>>> maltman23 at hotmail.com>
>>>
>>>
>>> Hi Naomi,
>>>
>>> Here's a follow up on my conversation with two SF inspectors today, an
>>> electrical & building inspector:
>>>
>>> 1. First, to allay any remaining concerns, the electrical inspector is
>>> on-board with our plan and will not be making any more surprise visits.  I
>>> filled him in on the electrical prep-work we intend to do and I told him I
>>> will file the electrical permit this coming Monday, with the intention to
>>> schedule the survey inspection for July 8th. He said that this approach is
>>> fine with him and he doesn't anticipate any big new problems, based on his
>>> original visit.
>>>
>>> 2. FYI, I'm told that the complaint was filed by Robert Noel (who
>>> appears to be the building owner...or that's what the electrical insptr
>>> said: is this correct??)
>>>
>>> 3. I also spoke with a building department inspector who was initially
>>> ONLY *concerned about people living in the space*, since it is zoned
>>> for office/workspace, not housing.  Specifically, you cannot have a "full
>>> kitchen", only an "employee break room".  So the oven has to be removed
>>> along with any cooktop or range.  (A hotplate for boiling water is OK.)
>>> Also, there cannot be any bathing facilities (tub or shower).  He wants to
>>> visit to verify that nobody is living in the space, but (so far) he will
>>> not require that we file a building permit.  I say, so far bc...
>>>
>>> 4. Later in the call, the building inspector also mentioned that any
>>> building code violations would need to be corrected, in particular, *any
>>> walls that were constructed without a permit must be legalized (ie, pass
>>> inspection...) or be removed.*  I believe there are several walls in
>>> this category (though I didn't mention that to him).  He may 'look the
>>> other way,' during a visit, since the complaint is focused on peeps living
>>> in the space... or he may red-tag the un-permitted walls and require
>>> legalization.
>>>
>>> FYI, we are not General Contractors, so we wouldn't be the right
>>> advisors for you about how best to meet the requirements of the building
>>> code.
>>>
>>> We can recommend a GC who will have good ideas about how best to
>>> approach this part of the complaint.  If you like, we can ask him to stop
>>> by next week and share his thoughts.
>>>
>>> In the meantime, I can look up the building permit history and let you
>>> know what work HAS been permitted and inspected in the last 20 years or
>>> so.
>>>
>>> FYI, Neil and I will be in tomorrow morning if anyone wants to chat, or
>>> just give a call anytime.
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>> Tim
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Wed, Jun 25, 2014 at 7:43 PM, Naomi Most <naomi at nthmost.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> We were apparently surprise-visited on Monday, I was just informed.
>>>>
>>>> Here's the link:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> http://dbiweb.sfgov.org/dbipts/Default2.aspx?page=AddressComplaint&ComplaintNo=201465341
>>>>
>>>> Do you want me to call the city, or are you guys handling this?  I
>>>> thought you were going to schedule a walk-through inspection for early
>>>> July... but I don't know if that causes the city to "call off the
>>>> dogs" so to speak or whether their processes are a little disjointed.
>>>>
>>>> Have I misunderstood what's expected from Noisebridge in terms of
>>>> interacting with the city?
>>>>
>>>> Please advise.
>>>>
>>>> --Naomi
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Naomi Theora Most
>>>> naomi at nthmost.com
>>>> +1-415-728-7490
>>>>
>>>> skype: nthmost
>>>>
>>>> http://twitter.com/nthmost
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>> --
>> Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Build mailing list
>> Build at lists.noisebridge.net
>> https://www.noisebridge.net/mailman/listinfo/build
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Shannon Lee
> (503) 539-3700
>
> "Any sufficiently slow descent into barbarism is indistinguishable from
> normalcy."
>
>                   -- @mediapathic
>
> _______________________________________________
> Build mailing list
> Build at lists.noisebridge.net
> https://www.noisebridge.net/mailman/listinfo/build
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.noisebridge.net/pipermail/build/attachments/20140627/5316d8c6/attachment-0003.html>


More information about the Build mailing list