Different modifications and what the specific requirements would be. We expect this to unfold over the next year or so and we thank you in advance for any support that you are willing to provide in the process, in the code modifications process. So, our next steps, again for the suite of strategies, the incentive grants and mandatory requirements. We are finalizing an implementation plan. We are coordinating with departments on an ongoing basis. We have begun Community Outreach but we will that, especially when our grant modifications are approved. We will do a big push to make it as visual as possible in our communities. Those immediate grant improvements that we are trying to do in the coming months are increase our program funding, which was actually done a couple of weeks ago. Our commission is funding pieces. We are trying to expand it for the additional project types. Special assistance for low income. Streamlined application process, enhanced assistance when it comes to the Grant Application and also the technical side of it. Technologies and permits and city processes and things like that. And also assistance with identifying qualified contractors who can perform the work. I also understand that supervisor safai requested an update on our cuyoga capital project. So, the status of that right now is that negotiations are underway with caltrans to develop a coop agreement. And that will establish the terms for their participation in the project. We are in the negotiation faze phase right now. I hope this update to describe our strategies has been informative. Thank you for your presentation. I see there are a few supervisors that are lined up to ask questions. Before we get to them, let me i know that in the april hearing, you did a pretty good job explaining the five, 25, 100year storms. And just to for the public that may not have been there or heard it, can you explain, for instance, when you say 25 years, what does it really mean in laymans terms . Theres been rain data captured in the city for over a hundred years. We have a very long record of what rainfall has fallen in the city. There was a Statistical Analysis initially performed in the 1940s that looked at the patterns we have seen as a city. And on a longterm average, a storm with a fiveyear return period would come once in every five years. And that doesnt mean that if a storm happened in 2000 that it is going to happen next in 2005. Because it is like rolling a dice. You could get two fives in a row backtoback, a week apart from each other. But on a longterm average, every five years. Likewise a storm with a 25year return period can occur once in every 25 years on a longterm average. And a hundredyear storm would be once in a hundred years. What that means in any given year theres 1 of a chance of that kind of storm occurring in San Francisco. I said that the data was originally done in the 1940s. But we have periodically looked at the rainfall record that has occurred since then in the many decades since the 1940s to confirm it still reflects the statistical trends of the data we have. I believe it was most recently done in the last five years. We have looked at all the data we have and the longterm Statistical Patterns and that curve is still relevant today. Now, as we move into the future, theres a lot of uncertainty with respect to what Climate Change is going to be bringing with respect to rainfall intensity. But unfortunately, what we dont have agreement in the Scientific Community about how our patterns may shift. We know that they may shift. Thank you. I just one of the things that we are always how do we compare with other places in california . Other places in california dont have combined systems with the exception of a small area in sacramento. So, when we talk about a combined system that carries both wastewater and storm water in the same set of pipes. The best comparison for us is other combined systems in really large urban areas. A fiveyear storm is typical for those large urban areas. New york city, chicago, philadelphia, seattle to name a few are all large urban areas with combined systems that have a fiveyear design standard for their infrastructure. I guess when you say we have a combined system neuroplaces, are they newer places, have they moved away from combined systems and pretty much have two systems . I i dont know the Industry Trends on that. So, most cities have a separate system and the reason they have separate system is because it is a cheaper system. Because the storm water when it overflows, you dont have to treat it. But we have a combined systems because we treat everything. Every drop of rain has some form of treatment in it. It goes through the treatment plants, to the box sewers and we have these box sewers around the perimeter of the city. So, it is a more expensive system to have. Is there any thinking whether or not it makes sense for us to go i know it is going to cost lots of money. But going to sort of a twosystem for San Francisco . I think the challenge is that in the early in the 1849s when our sewer systems were built, it was built as a combined system. They actually by the turn of 1899, we had 300 miles of combined pipes and we just continued to build off of that. So, to answer your question, if we want to separate the systems, both systems, one of the challenges is that our treatment mrame plants have a certain capacity. That means we would have to first separate all the sewers in all the streets. If you look at trying to separate the entire system, you are tearing every street up. It would be over 16 billion and i just want to point out that the cost of the sewer system comes from the rate payers who pays the sewer bills. So, it doesnt come from taxes or property taxes. It comes from your puc water and sewer bill. And so, that means that we would have to raise rates considerably if we want to perform a lot of these major Capital Investments. When you talk about the 16 billion or whatever it is for a twopipe system versus lets say to amend or fix a system that could actually have larger capacity, whats the difference in price . I mean, would it be cheap tore do one way cheaper to do one way or another . I think one of the challenges that we aring on the sewer system is that it is an old system. It needs a lot of Capital Investments. So, at one point you are looking at the collection, which we identify 1. 6 billion. But other than the collection, we have another 7 billion. We have to upgrade our treatment plants, our outfalls, our box sewers that capture. So, it is a lot of investments. So, if you add this on top of it so, the question is whats the balance . Because right now, your combined bill with water and sewer is an average of 71. But if we were to invest 16 billion, your sewer bill would be 400. And so, the question is that, it is affordability and you have to make choices. We are engineers. We can design for a hundredyear storm. Not a problem. It is about the cost and the disruption to the entire city to make that happen. And so, thats why we are presenting other options. And even in places where we are planning to do infrastructure, we want to offer these options because we know that it will take time to actually go through the Planning Design and its construction. And we wanted to make sure that, you know, you can fight Mother Nature for so long. But we are trying to adapt and give options that people with invest in their property. There are some areas we look at flooding, some homes flood and right next door, some do not. One of the reasons is that if you have a downsloping driveway that goes below the sidewalk, those folks flood. And right adjacent to it, they have driveways that are above the sidewalk and they dont flood. And so, thats why we are looking at ways to try to, you know, help people and have this construction adapt to these lowlying areas where water comes to those lowlying areas when our sewers are filled up. One last question. In terms of your outreach, i know that 50 people showed up. Did we actually reach the residents that were heavily impacted, like cuyoga . So, we have email lists of stakeholders that have come to any of our flooding events in the past. So, we sent email notifications out about all of the community meetings. But we also went doortodoor and had conversations with anyone we could reach. But also distributed over 200 flyers including the cuyoga corridor. We tried different ways to outreach to individuals and we are also planning to do a followup. We are going to send another email out to say for those of you who are able to make it, we appreciate it. And for those who werent, heres a lot of links to the information we presented and we invite you to let us know if you would like to have a personal phone call with our staff or a personal meeting to be able to go through some of this material if it is of interest to you. I appreciate sounds like you have made an effort. But sometimes the effort doesnt result to what which is the question i have is even with that effort, were you able to reach at least some of many of the residents that were heavily impacted . With the flyer for sure. We left flyers on each of their doorsteps. Does that answer your question . My question is really straightforward. Out of 50, would you say 25 of them came from the heavily impa impacted . I see what you are saying. Of the 150 of them, about half were from the cuyoga neighborhood. And of those, just sort of in my general sense of who was there, about half of those were people who are impacted by flooding. And the other half were sort of interested or concerned or so, we didnt reach the whole cuyoga neighborhood in person. But we also hope that the followup that were planning this weekend next would be able to reach some of those individuals in a more personal way. Thank you. Supervisor safai. Thanks, supervisor. So, just to build on that point because i think supervisor sheehy and i share part of the city that has some of the worst flooding when water is coming up to the side of a car. It is not the same as coming township the top of your foot. And i think what you saw in the frustration the woman walking out of this room is that, yes, we are experiencing Global Warming and it is real. And what that means is something that might have occurred every 15 years or every 20 years is now happening every other year. And so, i think theres a lot of frustration in years and years of buildup because majority of the homeowners in our district have lived there 30, 40 years. This is the only home they have known this is something they inherited or bought a long time ago. This is a part of San Francisco, these are working families. And they have no other options really. So, you have a lot of children. You have a lot of monolingual speakers. You have people coming from all over the world and this is a home that was not disclosed to them that they were experiencing flooding. They were not it was not identified to them that this was something that they would experience. And so, they are horrified. And so, i think the right way to approach this is theres a very organized group in our district that can identify every single home that is experiencing major flooding. And so, what i would suggest is working with that group to identify those 50 or 60 homes. I want to commend the puc. I know would have been having a lot of conversations on information before purchasing the home and raising the driveways. We are looking at maps yesterday where theres new construction right next to a home that has a downward sloping driveway and that person is experiencing significant flooding and the one next door has a driveway that slopes up to the home and. I think there are more Affordable Solutions than making the sewer up to a hundredyear capacity that would affect the rate payers dramatically. If you are talking about a three or 400 million upgrade for one system to even get it to a 25year storm versus doing raising the foundations or the driveways or 50 or 60 homes, you are talking about saving millions and millions of dollars. So, maybe a 20 million project for 50 or 60 homes versus 400 million. That is a lot of savings but it is real. I think we need to move quicker. We have had early conversations with contractors this is what they specialize in. I think we need to get i would request the puc to put together a request for information, rfi, get a qualified list of people together. We can build out a scope of work. You all are the experts. Lets come up with a cost estimate because we are getting into the rainy season again and i know from talking to these folks it just builds tremendous anxiety and stress because they know their homes are going to get flooded. They are not hoping for no rain in a drought and we had that for a couple of years and there wasnt anything. But, you know, 2 00 a. M. Beginning of this year, there was five minutes of dramatic rain and my phone started ringing off the hook at 3 00 or 4 00 in the morning and i know supervisor sheehy was down there in the early a. M. And the water stays there for a while. Im glad we are pushing caltrans. I know initially they didnt want to continue to investigate looking at reengineering and having some flood mitigation at the end of cuyoga. I understand that it is a little bit slower to work between interdepartmental agreements. But i think we just need to do everything we can to move quicker at this point. Lets have a firm date on the rfi. Lets have some cost estimates and then work with the folks in the audience that have identified they can tell you exactly the 50 or 60 homes. I dont want to get into semantics. But if two feet of flooding is happening in my home versus three feet and you are going to say no for the two feet, that just doesnt seem fair. I think at some point if theres flooding in the home and the property is being dodammed, we have to figure damaged, we have to figure out a strategy to mitigate that. This is many, many years of buildup in terms of the infrastructure and design. That is not pointing fingers at any of you. But there are billion dollars projects all over the city and then you have one part of the city that has water coming up to peoples car door. It feels unfair. So, i think that it is important we move aggressively at this point. You have had time to put together a plan. Maybe it is rebuilding barriers and moving driveways. Lets move aggressively so we are not here next year right when the raining season is going to start and people are feeling that anxiety again. So, if you can give us an idea. Maybe director kelly can come up and say what it would take in terms of a time frame. What would be a reasonable amount of time to come up with an rfi. And im talking about the extreme before selling the home. People dont want to sell their homes. Lets talk about the extreme of raising the foundation and what that would cost and a time frame for that. So, our plans are we recognize first of all that approachi approaching homeowners, low income. We are trying to develop the Grant Program to make it easier for them. So, we are putting out a request for interest on designers and contractors. And so, hopefully by the end of this movant, we will have a list. However, if the applicant is familiar with their own designer or contractor, thats fine as well. We want to make sure that they understand the types of options that are out there and work with the designers and contractors to achieve that. So, the plan is that probably in two, three weeks we are going to go out with that. Great. We are just going to put a quick rfi and make sure people are bonding and insurance. So, we are going to move forward with that. What is important is we are going to provide these options and we are going to let people know. It is really really depends on them filling out the application and taking the initiative that, yes, we want to, you know, utilize the Grant Program and be in the program. I would just say to go back on that point. Some of the organized neighbors have an entire list, phone numbers, addresses, emails. I think that would be a good place to start. Then some of them are attorneys. They can help with filling out the applications for those that might not be as familiar with that process. I think it would be a clab rotive collaborative effort. Some people are intimidated by that. Im sorry to interrupt. If theres any feedback, we want everyone to participate. We want to try to make sure that they participate so we can reduce the risk of their homes flooding. We would like everyone participate because even if we were to go from a fiveyear to a tenyear, some of these areas when it goes beyond that will still flood. I think it is pru dent for everyone to take prudent for everyone to take us up on this program. I think theres going an upgrade over near the Farmers Market. How much pressure is that anticipated to take off of the area that floods on cuyoga . Do you know . The objective of that project is to meet our level of service and to minimize flooding from a fiveyear storm in that specific location. But it will have an impact on whats happening higher up along the cuyoga corridor. So, i think what the very preliminary modeling is showing is that by building the parallel sewer and increasing our capacity, that at the foot of cuyoga near 280, in that area, we would be looking at cutting flood depth in half in a 25year storm. Thats what the preliminary model is showing. But that project is still in very, very Early Development phases. It will be undergoing more detailed analysis. Thank you. Just one last question for director kelly. So, after the two or threeweek rfi process, how much time do you anticipate before work could potentially begin on some of those homes . I know you have to create the grant. Yeah. Right now they are actually applicants can apply. And for the dry wet proofing, they can apply. It is really a case by case situation. And thats why we would like to meet on site, look at because it is very Site Specific on what measures would actually work. So, you know, we are going to take it case by case on every one of the applicants. So, if we have 60 applicants, we plan to meet with each and every one of them. Thank you. Supervisor sheehy. A couple of things that i wasnt aware. What is this with what is the plan . I dont think that was really i think maybe supervisor safai has been informed about it. But the caltrans plan. What are you looking to do there . That project is at the culdesac of cuyoga, below rouso. I know the area well. I have been down there. So, what we would be proposing to do is to make maximum use of the caltrans property thats there. And right now the berm supports the highway. What we have to do first is build a structural wall to hold up the highway and that would allow us to remove the berm and regrade that area to create a depressed detention area so that the water when it floods has a place to go instead of just sitting in the street and sitting up against the berm and creating a pool there. It would move into the area that the berm now takes up and have a place to go. So, we would be regrading the street, regrading building the structural wall, regrading the property and then the water would be able to fill up and sit until the peak intense rainfall has passed. Whats the timeline on that . Thats not going to happen this year . No. No. I think if negotiations go well with caltrans, i if i remember correctly, the construction was in 2019 or 2020 to start. 2019 or 2020. You and i need to push them on that because they initially said no. And then i had a scheduled meeting with them on a whole host of issues in my district and thats when we reopened the conversation to say this is something we share a desire to push because this could help with the mitigation. Now they have been work for the last five months on creating the opportunity through an mou to work together. Caltrans is all about liability and doesnt want to do anything. Yeah. We sent the project concept to them early in 2017. And then they said no, we are not interested in the project. And then supervisor safai held a meeting and asked them to please work with us to consider it a little bit more carefully. And so now, we are in the negotiation phase. But they still havent done a detailed review. The mou defines their involvement in terms of even just reviewing the documents we submitted earlier this year. And then, what is the timeline for the almeny fix . That project is part of our Capital Program phase two. So, that is a little bit later in the 2020s. But i would to go back and give you an exact date. Ki follow up with you on i can follow up with you on that. So, the combination of those two elements, to what degree would that reduce the level of flooding . Our metric for flooding is our design storm which is a fiveyear storm. And theres no flooding in the upper cuyoga corridor. So, these no flooding in that culdesac in our design storm. So, we have to look at larger storms to understand what the benefit would be and i can get back to you and we can take a look at that and get back to you. I keep getting a sense that we are going to be spending a lot of money and im wondering and doing a lot of work raising houses. I just wonder having been down there immediately after and having seen the flood line, i just wonder if we are really getting to something that is really going to fix things. I look at the Grant Program and raising houses and doing, you know, wet and dry protection. Its just wiping it down, i know that it is just not attractive. And i understand. But it is just and i dont supervisor safai was mentioning is there any possibility, is there any real way to negotiate at least for that last block which is what i saw as being most dramatically hit to figure out a way to make people whole enough so the purchases could take place . Unless you are going to fundamentally change the way in which water moves through that, i just i just i just dont know. Raise a house three feet. I was seeing four or five feet of flooding. And being able to wipe down your walls and have your walls not be all funky, its still funky there. That entire block is funky. Im trying to put a very polite word on there. But i know for the residents, they would use much more extreme language and i can totally understand why they would. And i know a house on that block is for sale right now. At least it was yesterday. So, are there possibilities to like can we have one conversation please . So, we have definitely interested as an option of purchasing property. But we would have to, you know we are working with the City Attorney because we have to offer fair market value. And what we are intending to do is fair market value considering that if you were not in that lowlike area. And so, thats what we would offer someone. So, it would probably be more than they would actually sell because we are now saying you have to disclosure in that area. So, that was in the plan. So, it would have to be willing sellers. The other way is go Eminent Domain , which we didnt want to go in that direction. Because people like supervisor safai said, that there are so many folks who lived there for years. So, we are looking at every option possible. Because im just curious. Do we have a plan . Because it did seem like that that one block is like really bad. And somehow converting that into especially if we get the caltrans piece as well, might be able to alleviate some of the pressure on the houses upstream and maintain and sustain the neighborhood. Has there been any thought about looking to see if we could and again, this would have to be i understand with the willingness of the sellers. But when you start looking at various costs, this Grant Program is going to be expensive. You have to go in every year after the floods and try to make people whole. So, we pay costs not every year. But every time theres a big flood. Theres a cleanup. But is there a model if we could somehow have a conversation with the folks on that one block and take that space i didnt see any other way. I mean we will go we can do these grants and raise houses. But from everything i saw, the water comes up above that. And we are not going to get the caltrans space it sounds like for at least a couple of years. And then the alemany is more years down the road and we have human beings living with this situation. I think for them if they were to say to me i find this intolerable, i would certainly agree. Because what i saw was really, really, really im trying to keep the tenor down. Because i know people are so frustrated. It doesnt seem like we really have a plan within the next year or two that will solve the problem. And we are pouring money into it. And i feel these folks are my neighbors. Just because im at the helm doesnt mean i dont feel for them terribly. I feel like i can understand why blaine got so frustrated. Because we keep going around and around. But we never like say, okay, this is the way we are going to solve the problem. And i think we always try to put band aids on it. I understand we had this whole back and forth and we do need the cooperation of the community in order but either we have to build a new sewer, which seems unfeasible or it seems to me these just two choices. Either build a sewer or buy out the folks who are impacted. The way in which the whole thing flows if we are going to have a fix soon. Thats just my opinion. I dont know where the neighbors are on that. And i dont know what the conversations have been about. And it does sound like theres some progress in making fair market value. Actually what the house would be worth if it wasnt in this location. Because i dont want to see people pushed out of the city. Everybody here has helped build this beautiful city. But just hoping that we could have some sort of dialog that doesnt where people feel like we are getting somewhere. You know, you have to apply for a grant and have somebody come out and do work on your house and then at the end of the day, you are still going to have a couple of feet of flooding by all the things that i have seen that is going to be disgusting. I know you are trying to work your way through it because this is kind of novel. To the degree we can incentivize people, especially in the hardest hit blocks and maybe look at ways we could repurpose that land to take pressure off because otherwise it is like 50 or 60 houses. . You could really concentrate thats a natural low point. To have something that could maybe allow everybody else to have i dont know. I know im just kind of wandering around. But i feel peoples frustration. I know the pressure you are under because at the end of the day, some things cost you look at the long run if we could somehow solve for this soon, i think we would end up better off for rate payers and better off for the neighbors. I would definitely i definitely understand your frustration. I remember early this year we called you and we went down there. And i agree. It is really a bad situation. So, thats why, you know, we are, like we said, are working with caltrans to try to do that. We thought it would be a quicker fix. And then we have the alemany with the Farmers Market will alleviate that. Meanwhile, the challenges even if we do that work, if we get a hundredyear storm, it is going to be the same situation. You have to start adapting. We can spend as much money, but you are going to have a bigger storm. And so, the question is, when we our system tried to collect as much water it never floods when it doesnt rain. Dont see raw sewage come out when it duvents rain. You only doesnt rain. You only get it when you get these flash events. It was like 15, 20 minutes it just downpoured. And kwhaps is so much what happens is so much water comes in and the system is pressurized. It goes out the manholes because it is so much water trying to get in there. High School Highly pressurized. And the reason it pops out the manholes, which we want it to, because if it didnt, it would blow out your home toilets. It is a challenging system. But, ultimately, those are our customers and we are trying to do what we can. Going back to your point is we are definitely open to purchasing property. Especially in that area. We are going to look at the properties that are currently up and we will probably have a conversation with those folks in the area and see what options would be best suited for them. Supervisor fewer. Thank you. Thank you very much. So, this is completely overwhelming. I just have some questions, but i do think that this is at a level now which is so severe and because we have seen nationwide flooding and also natural disasters that we didnt think we would see in a thousand years. So, when we hear a fiveyear estimate, im just thinking a fiveyear storm, we are preparing for that, which is 1. 3 inches in three hours. I dont know. Im sort of thinking myself, mr. Kelly, that the topography and the raising of the housing, the house next door, you fix the driveway. That one next door is not flooding. But how do we know it wont . I think when we had the first presentation here, we spoke a lot about the topography of San Francisco where these natural areas where they flood. And i think that so, some of the questions i have are we have certain areas we have designate, cuyoga, folsom and others as being the most severe. Is that correct . These are the three areas we have talked about. Yeah. Part of the presentation we identified the lowlying areas which were formerly creeks and marshes. We pointed out if we were to make Capital Investments what the cost would be. Economical. Yeah. So, then im wondering do these homeowners ever ask for a reimbursement on the damages and if we have had that throughout the years and what is that amount of money that we pay out . So, i think that i guess the way that i would respond to that is that for a storm event larger than our sewer can handle and you live in a lowlying area, i think the city can do what it can do. But, i dont know if we are totally responsible for alleviating flooding from ever happening to everyone. Like in houston. The city is not paying everyone for the system. The system performed as designed. It is just Mother Nature. And thats where you have insurance. So, one of the things that we are asking folks to also do is have Flood Insurance if you are in those lowlying areas. Thats why you have fema and all that out there available. So, thats a question that i had. Has there been designated as an official flood area . So, thats one of the things that we wanted to make sure that people are aware that these are flood prone areas and we are mapping it. We are doing a hundredyear flood prone map that we are planning to release and have everyone to understand that you are buying property or you own property in a lowlying area. But we havent done that yet . We are working on it right now. Thats one of the first things i wanted to do because when i was out there a year ago, a lot of folks said i just bought this house and i didnt know that it flooded. Although it is a requirement for the seller to disclose apparently the person didnt disclose. So, we are trying to have mechanisms in place where buyers are aware of these areas. Yeah, because you must if you are designated in a flood area, you must buy Flood Insurance in many cities. And i think i didnt know what the official designation was. I know my sister in nevada lives one block away from a flood zone and she wasnt required to buy Flood Insurance. But we are recommending she does. Is there an designation an official designation because we would like give people recourse. The supervisor mentioned there is a home for sale right now. And is someone going to buy it knowing they have a flood problem . So, fema does designate formal flood planes. They map them. And San Francisco is in process of finalizing those. When we look at the fema flood maps, the preliminary maps, they are along the bay and along the ocean. There are no open Waterways Mission creek doesnt any longer run. Right. But that actually works to our advantage in San Francisco because anyone is eligible to purchase fema Flood Insurance. If you are in a flood zone, the premiums are very high. But if you are not in a fema designated flood plane, premium rates are very low. And last year i think if you are a renter and you are ensuring content only, it was like 44 a year for the premium. And if you were an owner and insuring contents and structure, the premiums started at 137 a year. It is not like earthquake insurance. Especially when you are not in a designated flood zone. I think fema wants to have people not in flood zones into into their plan. There was a little bit of a clerical error in femas designation of San Francisco that we worked through feinstein to fix. And now and then we hosted with fema an Insurance Agent training last year i think to make sure that the Insurance Industry it was completely sold out. It was to make sure the Insurance Industry understands how to provide these insurance policies to their clients. And so, now we are doing outreach, but we do encourage Property Owners and renters to get Flood Insurance through the fema subsidized fema program. And with most of our flood prone areas not being in official fema flood areas, it is good for insurance rates. This flooding isnt water. It is raw sewage. We have been hearing folks last testimony last time was about raw sewage flooding into their homes. Into their basements. Have we done any Health Assessments on that at all . Do we know anything about that . It just sounds like a complete hot mess if that was your house. Yes, you might be able to clean up everything. I dont know. I know this is something not only that but the idea of living there, knowing every time it rains that this could happen. It could drive you crazy. Im concerned these probably a health aspect to this now and a health hazard. So, our systems are designed to be a combined system. So, the majority of the when we size a pipe, we size it based on a fiveyear storm. That is going to come statistically once every five years. When we dont have rain in dry weather, in the summer for example, those pipes are almost completely empty. The amount of raw sewage flowing through the pipes is just a trickle in the bottom of the pipes. When we get a big enough storm that causes flooding, so much water that our pipes are completely full, the sewage the amount of sewage in that combined water is less than 1 city wide. Im not trying to say that sewage isnt there. Yeah. But i do want everyone to understand that it is diluted it is not raw sewage as we think of raw sewage, which is what is trickling down the pipe in dry weather. It is more than 99 storm water and then a small portion of sewage. That said, urban storm water is not clean. Yeah. So, when you think about when you are walking down Market Street and everything that you see on the sidewalk washing down into the gutters and into our pipes, we are talking about, you know, peopling walking their dogs and birds and things like that. Humans. Theres all kinds of stuff in urban storm water. We have been in conversations with the Public Health department about this. But i would say that any flooding when it comes to urban environments like this is unsanitary. Yeah. Right. Actually, i dont see the situation getting better, especially immediately. I concur with the supervisor that i think we are in for much more flooding. I think if we are looking at how the world is changing and the climate, these areas will always be flood zones. We can try to mitigate some of the things about walls or this or that. But Mother Nature has the last word and we have seen that very clearly regarding flooding but also fires, everything else. We are going into us unprecedented, environmental hazards we have never seen before. I guess my suggestion concurs with the supervisor. I think we should do an assessment of which of the homes will always be in the flood zone. To say it is a fiveyear we dont get that. But we dont get well, houston also built like crazy. And thats what happens when you put concrete on everything. Also the fact we dont even have a municipal code about the infrastructure. If people were to build on that property, we dont even have a code that addresses that which exacerbates the problem. Should we be building on these areas where we know they flood and have a tendency to flood . Should we be allowing people to be building on these areas knowing we cant you can try to control and mitigate the situation, but eventually it is out of our hands. So, i just think we should be looking at home homes are the hardest hit, where theres an appetite for homeowners to have their homes bought and if we do acquire that land, what are some of the things we can do to help mid gait some mitigate some of the issues. That is land we can actually work with. Thanks. I wanted to chime in. First i want to appreciate the puc because there has been a lot of progress between the last hearing and today. And i feel as if you have laid out a very clear set of interventions that you are willing to make, work with homeowners that are affected up to purchasing the property. And echoing my colleagues i do think that thats probably going to be the right option if individuals are willing to sell. I also want to express gratitude because this was sort of a demand of myself and my colleagues that you purchase at market rate, not taking into account the flooding. And you are offering that. And i think that thats as much as we can expect. And so, i just absolutely like all of us feel so much for the homeowners and individuals that are impacted by this. It is awful. We have seen the heartache and it is completely understandable. But we are now at a stage we know we are not going to build our sewer system larger than a fiveyear storm and that makes sense. The cost benefit analysis to build a bigger sewer system and the havoc it would cause on the streets of dont make sense to me. And might not even deal with the problem given the extreme weather events that we are having throughout the world these days. I think it is time for homeowners to realize where we are at in the situation we are in and to work with the puc and the supervisors because we can all play a role in being helpful here in the neighborhoods that are impacted to face the reality of the situation and to choose the best options. And it is such a grim hearing and it is every single time. The benefits of a combined system is that all water gets treated before it is released back into the bay and that given how quite frankly we all recognize how gross the streets are in San Francisco, which is an issue we are all dealing with in our district. But that is also a positive thing. I just wanted to have one light to this dismal hearing. But i do want to work with the residents in my district and the puc to face the facts and look at the options, use the individualized assessments that the puc is willing to do and come up with the right option for each property. I will wrap it up then if theres no other questions for my colleagues. I want to thank puc for the presentation today. When i called for the hearing and it was heard in april, much of the discussion was about, you know, why homes are being impacted by rain and so forth. And we talked about the fiveyear storms and 25year storms. So, a lot of it was pointing out that it happens because of certain things and our system isnt able to handle beyond a certain storm. And what we didnt talk about was what we talked about today. What are some of the solutions . Even though we cant solve everything, we didnt hear as much of a solution oriented discussion in april. Thats why i asked for a continuation of that particular hearing so that you could come back and say, well, you have thought about it, war what are you planning to do. I appreciate that although the solutions presented today or the strategies may not be perfect for everybody, i feel like theres been some real attempt to look at the situations for my district. Seems like two of the three hot spots wet spots will be somewhat mitigated and i know that there will be a discussion over at 15th and ramona. That will take a little more time to get to. But again, i appreciate that we are moving in the right direction and hopefully we can move quicker. Especially for those heavily impacted at cuyoga. Madame chair, i think i will ask for this item to be tabled and then if we need to have further discussions, we could call another hearing. Supervisor ronen i will make a motion to file this item. Without objection, that motion passes. Thank you. And i will just note that supervisor yee has officially replaced supervisor sheehy for the remainder of the hearing. Or of the committee meeting. Sorry. Mr. Clerk, we already did call item two, right . We can just begin the item . Clerk yes. Just for the record i will read it again. Supervisor yee has been appointed in place of supervisor sheehy to sit in as a member of todays meeting. Item two, ordinance amending the public works code to require a permit for the testing of Autonomous Devices on sidewalks amending the police code to provide for administrative or criminal devices and affirming the planning departments determination under the california Environment Quality act. Supervisor ronen thank you so much. Supervisor yee. Thank you. Colleagues, thank you for your patience for these items today. Thank you for hearing this item again. And we have a number of robots robust discussions. [laughter] yeah, i know. Especially on balancing the need to prioritize or sidewalks for people. San francisco is a city that supports technology innovation. However, there are unintended consequences when the industry goes unchecked. It is our obligation as elected officials to protect our limited public resources, including our sidewalks. It is important to make sure that it was never a ban on delivery devices. It was about our obligation as elected officials to protect our limited resources such as our sidewalks. To this date it is unlawful for bicycles to operate on sidewalks. However, the Delivery Device Technology really is in its infancy and one that is requesting to operate on a Public Infrastructure. We are compelled to create Regulatory Framework to ensure public safety. Until this technology is perfected, until a thoughtful system is in place for emerging technologies, we really need to regulate this as a new realm and carefully considered and crafted. Up until late yesterday, i continued to meet with companies that are interested in automated deliveries in San Francisco. Received feedback from departments that oversee our Public Infrastructure and from my colleagues and also from those that are advocating to keep our sidewalks for people. In order to create legislation that works for the city, this board of supervisors had to work on a number of amendments. San francisco prides itself at being a walkable city and every one of us has spoken about the desire for more familyfriendly city. The version introduced at the last Board Meeting in addition to the amendments being introduced today strengthens the legislation and allows us to protect our residents, Public Infrastructure and support the technology and the tech sector. I have continued to meet with companies and now have hopefully the support of these amendments. This legislation is an example of meaningful regulation of emerging technologies that ensure safety of our sidewalks, maintains quality of life, upholds our values of protection of