and nobody gets out of a car going thirty mile-per-hour to windows hop when there are plaza and walk and get out and bike and take transit people will more likely to get off their bike to walk by a store and it benefits the blood alcohol merchants for me who works and lives in the area this is stealing he needed from an emergency situation from the times i've almost been hit almost every single i walk through the area. >> thank you. >> last person to turn in a speaker card mary maguire. >> here we are i see your diagram now we've lost another kind of kind of bike stands we lost anothers cabstands give us a cab stands at the ball park between townsend and king on both sides so we can gets 0 in and out of there what are we supposed to side if we can't say make a left-hand turn go to market street if someone to pick up on second street how are we going to get them anywhere it's on a right turn on market street i mean this is nice but then once again, why not eliminate all cars on market street and put commercial cars i don't know what what floating is why on castro is a constant traffic jam nobody needs to park on it block a commercial zone on fulsome street maine i go to work on eight street you have to reinforce those a huge bike lane on fourth street i've seen people on the left-hand side i've mentioned the bike lane is on the one side how many minutes have you a huge lane why holdings up traffic it takes me to get to work sometimes an hour from rincon hill to the cab company and it takes 10 minutes to get home fulsome street is is a mess trying to get to the bay bridge you need to think this thing through better so thank you. >> members of board. >> director heinecke. >> i have two questions i'll direct to director reiskin if i could give us an anticipation of cars on second street quietly go i assume some anticipation of car reductions bus second street crease other options or frustrated by traffic and not drive a summary and the second question which maybe my discussion provoking question the way i look at this plan as implemented that street will be essentially undriveable allergy anyone in a private available you'll have a single lane of traffic in either directions at times subject to people making turns although the turn pockets will back up but more importantly a single lane of traffic with traffic lights and when busses stopped at their stops will block because one lane of traffic in each direction it is sounds market street why would anyone drive on this street i wonder why not take it the next level and do with second street like market street it is transit and taxis only free up that street for that sorts of vehicle traffic i think you solve the ball park if you have a dedicated taxi lane running flet south with with the subway train i'm sure someone thought about that i know we can't do this today given the environmental impact but to me it strikes me we should be long-term planning and to one of the public commenters if we create a north-south version of a transit only red carpet street that will, something that julie and her staff this should be considering if we're going to have a more transit friendly north-sou north-south artistry want to put more traffic those are big picture questions you'll probably wishing i didn't ask them but to me this proposal i appreciate the first step but i have an interesting reaction to it i have a reaction to you all can just it is two midly we leave the street and put in pedestrian or we go all the way but to me this proposal is going to make private car traffic untenable. >> we look forward and welcome comments from the boards i'ask christina and julie we didn't do angle analysis for a car free street the combarng between market market if have park it not a pattern for people were accustomed to and building to accommodate people pulling up to park so i think this is a little bit different than market many, many streets more of them north of market that are essentially gone lane in each direction for transit i think in terms of it being you can essentially a transit you know high quality transit facility the improvements will help transit but it is one lane in each direction interest will be plenty of people that be assessing second street and in their car it will be less attractive as a freeway approach but lots of businesses with small shops that folks will be coming by many memos to come back by so i'm not sure it is going to be a street that will accommodates a whole lot more muni volume the muni staff as a part's of planning and the services staff it did benefit from a lot of different input but the main issue of second street is a 2 flats a street in that part of town if you're on a bike that really works from the embarcadero to the etc. is the next and 5th center the to the west so as many hayne said a matter of trade offs for prioritizing the streets for not good alternatives from deriving from muni pained wlanz on third street that is a major corridor other alternatives for different modes we didn't study car free version of the plan something that is implemented we evaluate what the auto use is fill parking elimination will be problematic for folks and in terms of where the cars go christine r a or ellen can talk about that as part of the environmental impact for the project. >> christina if public works so to answer your questions as we all know street street not a direct route a lot of people uses it for a orientals but a big part of second street the revitalizing the streets for people w that live and work there and not an alternative route as director reiskin said one of the two-way streets in selma and as such we know that is a critical route for taxis to eye second street to and from and want to shift the vision of second street to leave it on for people trying to get to the small businesses around the grilled cheese company and hensleys spirits and the nail salon industries after south park but drive outside of the area so as far as what are other routes i've pulled up the map of selma the environmental impact studied 29 sgshgsz between market and king, first to third and we looks at 5th and bryant as one of the freeway on ramps so the additional routes it is articulating battery to first montgomery to new montgomery if you're on new montgomery make the resistance on howard, make the left on hawthorne and have the choice of fulsome or harrison if you are on second street southbound you would have to take howard to get to full name or harrison. >> i guess i said there are other ways to go really the balance there are currently a lot of cars on second street where will they go those routes you've described are in my experience are at cabinet. >> there are 11 intersections that have prestige level impacts 3 of them were able to be myth at southbound and harrison to provide a left-hand turn from left-hand turn all the time to take up the capacity and working with the waterfront to look at the improvements only beale and other streets on embarcadero to take some ever that need that demand. >> understood. >> well, i guess this remains something of an issue we should be discussing this is a major change in the way our city is moving our citizens around i certainly understand the need if not 92 just a unique corridors for bikes but if you walk up and down you'll see how many people will be living there in the future triple or quadruple judging but the cranes making the north south route decision and the ideas of a transit or enhanced transit lane i understand kantsz do that today not just muni but taxi or hof lane those are things in our disposal my fear we're going to have a calculated second street claw for the cars that made a bad decision and clog for the taxis i'm a little bit concerned about this proposal it is too much in the middle i think we should watch 19it i'm prepared to support it today but it is with some trepidation we'll have quick reluctance once it go in mines a timeline for implementation not very long; right? something we can do quickly. >> so the; correct contradiction will be at the end of 2016 and done by the middle of 2017. >> co-recordings to the subway by the way, maybe that will help alleviate. >> the creation of resistant pockets and the left-hand turn opportunities should help the traffic flow along second there will be congestion effects off of second but you know part of those designs was meant to keep the traffic and trachea flowing on second street. >> with respect to the taxi will it be two hours housing. >> what's before you is leging full-time. >> i'll stop i realize i've mop listed this director reiskin you'll not count on me for being precedence but i'll urge a second look at after a ball game and vegetation that are a lot of times we're using the corridors off traffic peak times if they can't make a left it will lead to larger microfilms money for passengers. >> the importance of second street it has a lot of small-scale businesses that a lot more local like grilled cheese and not fancy places people go they're 31 they have deliveries and people that get there sometimes by car and the majorities of their customer base it is for this street a place for people nostril pga through all studies have shown people that are consulting not our customers but people driving in that area because they want to be there so to insure people know this is under those circumstances not assess to the freeway and verbiage most people and peak hours are like on a daily basis the ones that discovered it the first and hopefully not make that mistake again and making sure that people i guess the only concern when the bus stops and making sure that we enforce the cars are not trying to go around the busy buses that stopped observing happens in corridors otherwise a great project second street is basically dead-ends in two spaces right king and embarcadero and market street has a ability to an calm down street friendliness and bike lanes i think this is a great approach and objective in the beginning in short will be absent more challenging in the beginning but once people get used to the patterns of what at the could and couldn't do it gets better of modifying on behalf of. >> i'm excited to support this this is not my neighborhoods but looking forward to another safeway to get through downtowns i have concerns that were previously voices i want to look at the taxi exemptions but approving it as it is now not prevent us from looking at it again that's all i have. >> thank you director heinecke for making me seem lake the mediator voice we can do something in the future if if it proves important awe applicable i know we've been hearing from a lot of people about masonic street if you can talk about what are we doing differently or lessons we've learned to apply to them this to keep us on schedule the. from our citizens i share is one of i am patience and as quickly as possible if we could talk about the timeline and how to keep it forward. >> one of our advantages on second street of one-half been an environmental impact for the past two years been cooperating with the other departments the public works and the mta so we have the project well independence the water and sewer the place will be repaved and as director borden said it ends at both ends up in a sense that is a little bit easier to deliver and federally funds we've be submitting our construction package to caltrain for approval in september they'll need to review it that's why we have a gap under our schedule and finish destine this winter and advertise but from a lot of projects like caesar chavez escape to complete a section or segment of the street before we demobilize and move on to streamlining from design to advertising and work hard the contract and trying to streamline construction as well. >> is that just to go back to this ma song we're hearing about that the masonic starts with the full board merging in dealing with outlet city agrees and improvements on timeline and delivery of projects and he guess i just want the public to have that confidence this project is more likely to stay on the timeline or being a city and dealing with city agencies yes something can always come up but to get us to the level of confidence. >> the schedule will stay as is we've been working on the project for several years we're at the tail ends and finishing the design and build it we have a lot of support if the communities and businesses not everybody is hundred percent confident that it has everything that everyone worksheets we have a lot of support going forward with the implementation of the project. >> thank you. >> thank you, chairman nolan my compliments to the staff sounds like a lot of hard work i couldn't be more excited about this i did looks like you've done a lot of thinking i appreciate supervisor kim for sending her staff and expressing her support i've clearly seen her out there and understand how urgent of a need there is more projects like this in the city as someone who goes and uses this corridor to get better from the ball park to the train station on a bike it is down right terrifying to ride a bike anywhere in south of market but this is the place to do it i would love to travel in the transmitted lanes everywhere at some point we should revisit this and it i feel that we need to do something soon i mean lives don't think it literally and great step forward to minimize the traffic and address the traffic issues i'll really encourage folks to consider how signage works to direct people do or into the best way to get to the freeway i've seen the signs to direct people to the freeway of a round about way people will get hip to it ever it is blocks away it is tremendously hopefully for people that are out of town that follows the flow of traffic and might ends up stuck i strongly encourage you folks to look at how to augment the mitigations by looking at the signage for a more a better route for all of us for them to be assessing the freeway signages is critical i think this is all i have to say i'll be obviously supporting the project and again want to - oh, yeah last thing i appreciate looking at the taxis i - i resent people make accusations we hate taxis we're having a juggle a lot of balls and taxis are important thank you all very much. >> i will be supportive i appreciate all the public outreach and community groups that came forward and the businesses and all of that i too burglary be interested in seeing the left-hand turn and the cab stand is there any way to replace that someplace and open to that as we get more and more information is under a motion. >> motion to approve. >> all in favor, say i. >> i. >> opposed? in the i's have it thank you staffer great job. >> 12 prosecution for the transit economic study no people that have expressed an interest in addressing on this matter. >> this is the meat. >> that matters. >> we've waited all day this. >> for this. >> good afternoon decorations we're excited to bring you this information we as a city have looked the delay in a negative side of transit not actually tried to quantify the added value in the system whether or not i can't great system that brings the city this is our first attempt to have the dialogue and discussion so - >> increase in strategy plan you've approved under goal that the improve the quality of life in san francisco and objective 3.2 to increase the impact to the economy before we need to know that we need the bottom line this effort to study the baseline we hired. >> consulting firm economic planning system one the premium planning groups in the area to assist us in this effort so i have jason moody a exfoliate that works on this i'll pass it over to him and we're both here to answer questions. >> good afternoon mr. moody. >> thank you. i'm jason with the economics and planning wear a real estate consulting firm with offices in oakland and sacramento and los angeles to build on what was said the person of this analysis to look at transportation in a really big picture from a return on investment or cost benefit flafls to look at muni services it is kind of a surprisingly kind of par.com transportation is looking at more and more those on the from the forehead level comparing the benefits to the costs the traditional formula for funding transportation in this study is in that vain vein of trying to look at the investments, if you will, be using a metrics in a field that is willing the metrics are getting better estimating the benefits and comparing the costs this is straightforward but the stems are a little bit more tricky next slide, please. >> in addition there is obviously the local context the city transportation infrastructure and the growth in the city that is pitting constraints this is a projection of growth we've experienced a lot of growth in san francisco in the last 5 or 10 years that will continue population growing 40 percent by 2040 and employment growing next slide, please. >> obviously going to put more and more pressure on transit and transportation infrastructure in general and obviously automobiles are not going to be able to solve that problem and basically the right-of-way and the capacity of the streets is already at capacity there muni is critical for meeting those targets that's a big picture context in terms of the methodology i alluded to it is anyone tiger's benefits and comparing them with cost and doing a cost benefit analysis you have the reports i think the detailed report part of the packet with the detailed analysis the calculations are transparency and we vetted the numbers and the model about the sfmta and the sf ct a with their transportation model and show the calculations we should a high and low rage for the estimates we provide i think the general kind of big picture assumptions this is why we're considering it we have to make a hypothetical assumption in some of the calculations what happens if muni didn't exist for parking demand and what happened to a whole host of things we had to do that in reality a content framework so it is a convert we made a hypothetical assumption you'll be able to continue to do things it will only be harder calculations as a result you know exclude a number of things value of foregone trips for example, if muni was there people would have to travel less there's a value we're not calculateing they include things for circling for parking and the costs they actually exclude the population employment growth this is a model based on the current circumstances now how much worse but the impacts will grow request population employment so we're going to look at as it is today preliminary skaegz we we looked at travel time savings phone call for muni drivers but automobile drivers they save times because muni reduces congestion and looked at the improved safety and the air quality issues and safety ones we didn't anyomonetize this services with the accessibility issues we didn't look at the last one i want to mention worker productivity next slide, please. >> obviously muni improves job assess and commute times it is for productivity the one we quantified the travel time how long it takes to get to work or commute, in fact, we looked that with the sfmta model and assumed a world in which muni was not there how much congestion and you put an seismic value on the cost of time and accompany with an economic estimate that is what that basis it go to the next slide we didn't monetize the productivity benefit from muni that essentially derives what you're able to get in different and people working next to each muni allows the urban formula that is really hard to game-changer we looked it but as a comparison type of analysis if you replaced - if you had to add more parking because muni didn't exist you'll have to replace 11 percent of the housing units and all the additional cars to be in the city car ownerships will go way up next slide, please. >> muni reduces travel costs has that's a straight up calculation and this is a pretty straightforward calculation a car obviously costs money to not only purpose but to maintain and operate muni costs money as well but on a per trip and per mile basis a set of facts for an automobile which you look at the costs biggest one is at our designation and look at that on a per mile basis that is significantly costs savings we committed that if the cost savings analysis okay muni reduces the needs to owner a car cars cost money we didn't through to be conservative not only to park at the designation but having a parish in our house car ownership in san francisco is less than 70 percent compared to 90 percent in the bay area this is largely for the transportation in muni the calculation we did as detailed basically. i'm sorry. >> that the car ownership rate will video to go up to san francisco the way we calculate up to percent and the calculations how many new parking spaces so have in other words, to do that and the cost of a parking space this is an illustration of interest because it shows you how space indoes he have for a overlay of candle stick park and if you think about the value the economic value combetsdz in the san francisco you get an idea of a space and other things related to car >> muni improves the environment this is obviously pretty intuitive basically the emissions per trip or per million people that use mini is less emissions we calculated that think a protocol on the cost of air reductions between the two modes and the volumes in this case and you come up with an economic estimate with that. >> safety is another one thing again on a per trip or per mile basis it is safer to travel from muffin travel relative to audit travel the analysis for all the muni travel what's the economic cost of the collision and again some standard methodology that put a price tag here's some of the findings that are pretty small we look at the annual impact and the fire chief earners back. >> no. it is easier in terms of of so obviously the amount of benefits far exceed the costs by depending on the high low on an annual $630 million to 1.5 billions of which is one thousand per residents and between 350 and $7 per trip when you look at in it in presents value that is the annual number and bringing it to a constant today's value the numbers are much more impressive on a per trip basis this is an overall cost benefit arbitrary this is technical between 2 and 3 which means for every dollar you invest our benefit is doibld to 3 times so overall muni is a strong investment relative to others investments out there in terms of next steps this is really more of kind of a you know feel good type of study (laughter) we do hope it improves the benefits of travel and understanding some of the discussion fitting for the day is about that there is a lot of decisions about cars versus transit and understanding the trade offs hopefully, will provide context we have a method dissolution for calculating a variety of metrics we can use going forward to update and understand the investments of - to potentially incorporate those metrics into the future budgeting decided and finally a lot of things we didn't look at bicycling and others services that sfmta provides and streetscape improvements complete streetscape sf was not evaluate there were other medics beyond the scope of this study we made this study directly to lead to with that, i'm available to answer any questions you may have. >> i have a question. >> questioned. >> can you apply it to methodology to others relationships actually, it is in someways to political to an individual i'm not sure if you're familiar with the federal level those are san francisco received money through that if i understand in motorbike they required a analysis and they select those projects bans which one has the history cost benefit and it is easy because you have more concrete information about the travel patterns and the streetscape about what is happening in some ways easy to do it at the local level this is challenging to try to go macro. >> did we plan to try to use this just because every time we have a lot of projects coming before us on a project based level this is even more relevance this is not the issue but on a project related basis this kind of stuff makes a difference. >> director that's the goal to be having a cost benefits analysis the system this is a starting point and hope to get more and more reif i understand but terrific to quantify for the public what the benefit cost of the individual projects so the first of a journey and hopefully, we're interested in making this a model of how we look at the world. >> i'd be rim if i didn't thank jason who is sitting in the audience thank you, jason. >> director borden brought up what i want to bring up this is a fantastic tool not only on a macro but a micro project by project i've not seen this come out of another traffic agency this is fantastic we're on the for the most part of calculate our benefits like director borden said we can point it to it this sort of an unusual thing. an agency >> i actually got the idea seeing that bart did it. >> seattle has done. >> bart's did to study to demonstrate bart to the region we were calculating how much we costs san franciscans when we have details so a small subtract from a unknown positive benefit that is why it is important to do this. >> i mean, i'm glad to see the awareness of the policymakers some of the information will be perfect to accepts to the assembly mentioning members that are working on the transportation funding infrastructure i think this is could possible help them with the laundering and framework to address that i'm looking forward to seeing how we're going to use that and expand it what benefit does that and what benefit if the pedestrian safety and bring this before the voters. >> thank you just quickly i really appreciate this is exciting i can't wait to do so the one on better management parking this is a premise ii think we all need more information available a few things i'd like to dig more deeply into the things you've listed as not being montana tied but the public health it is increasing more and more of a something we can address by way of our environment there is movement in the field of public health that is coming to light with the overall costs we live a more transportation lifestyle this is things for actively transportation i will encourage us to dig harder and figure out if it is not anyone tied maymon talk about it seems to me transit invaluable to people of lower-income and i know there is a tremendous cost savings that we allow people when they don't have to own a car and finding a way to be able to help put that into sound bite or a bullet point we can get out there will, tremendously helpful when we make the case for expanding the subway or putting in a light rail those are things that are associated with direct displacement or indirect displacement and pep people to understand how to get engaged in a project early enough enough but the long term benefits of some projects will be in terms of maintaining equity get to the real investment it is a wonderful thing i appreciate it. >> those points are right on we've seen what is happening for example, measuring the impacts the transportation system a lot of people working on quantifying that but the next iterations we'll quantify those i'm very optimistic we'll get there. >> thank you very much. >> well, thank you very much that's an excellent report any members of the public. >> herbert wiener now that we're alone. >> i support public transportation i came to this meeting on public transportation and leave the communities on public transportation i think this is necessary in light of the gridlock i couldn't agree more but observations i have you talk about travel time i ride the one california bus regularly there is a point of interest with the busses sometimes two to three buses that fellow each other and sometimes, we have to wait a long time for business and i always say when is the next bus going to come after we have weapons of mass destruction we talk about social equity you how about search and seizure and disabled having to walk to the bus and paratransit not a solution you have to reserve a day in advance and go four blocks on a paratransit vehicle is not okay when the muni forward is creating this inequity what i want to stress this is very important some people can't say not only drive in their 80s or 90s they create a danger to themselves and others i'll probably fall both that i'm 76 years of age but you'll have to give up my car sometime this is an important function that muni has your protecting the public and protecting individuals against potential injuries and accidents because of that you have to insure accessibility i wish this report would cover that those are my observations thank you. >> board members thank you, mr. moody fine report we have a quorum oh. >> mr. chairman item 13 is a vote for collection you have a member of the public. >> mr. pill pal is no longer here so. >> is there a motion? >> motion. >> second. >> all in favor, say i. >> i. >> how about a little break before we do the >> item 14 the mta met in clegs to talk about the local 25 a that matter that the case with the city attorney with the directors decided to close both and conducted the policy but the disclose or not disclose the information. >> not demolish. >> >> all in favor, say i. >> i. >> we're adjourned thank you very much, everybody. >> thank you. this is great day a historic day i'm going to make it quick with this large historic budget i know we're all rushed to get what can to work we have san francisco and the exciting things we get to do i'm excited again for me and the supervisors for the department heads and commissioners there were many years we look at each other and said what do we have to cut and how to communicate with our communities about the highest priorities are and i know it is historic for many reaps but that this is the first time we've be able to enjoy a new cuts budget in the city and county of san francisco (clapping) that is really worth celebrating (clapping.) i want to thank the buyer board of supervisors for again unanimously adapting this yesterday so it we can get to work and implement all the things we've promised to do budgets are the revenues of the values of this city i know that the board and my office and the budget office and harvey rose and everyone 0 recognizes that for many, many years thank you to all the partnerships and deliver to the for the purpose of san francisco a balanced budget that september occupy our city a budget that reflects a lot of hard work between going and the people we serve i want to particularly thank our sxhoopd who is be able to make sure this has good leadership of the board i also want to thank a ignore to the i successful effort our budget schar mark farrell and all the budget and finance committee supervisor tang and supervisor mar and supervisor wiener and little entire members of the audience and thank you to supervisor christensen she gets to say this is my first budget signing and thank you to all the departments, the commissioners and community leaders and again, thank you harvey rose because you're able to find what the board needed and make sure weal doesn't compromise what we wanted that's a great job again you know this is a historic budget as i said and a historic time for the city because of fiscal discipline we've really had throughout the entire boards staff, supervisors and the departments and because of smart economic policies to focused on job creation, innovation and resiliency in our residents and our business community this budget we're making historic investments to make sure our city remains save and solvent for everyone so everyone will prosper our city budget invests in the pedestrian safety thank you to our public safeties departments they know we're a growing city the board knows that as well and our growing demands in the first responders be there and have the confidence of the public they'll be there any time something happens and sometimes before things happen we plan to hire 4 hundred police officers a hundred and 98 firefighters 55 paramedics 369-1-1 dispatches within the next two years and we can all agree that save san francisco is more than just about pedestrian safety it is about strengthening our social safety net and this budget delivers with many members of the board said we have to make sure that we support our service deliveries through the nonprofits and support our homeless services like your navigation center the 5 hundred new unit that back up that center and make sure that center is the model it should be and expanding our programs for seniors and children and youth people living and working here can now enjoy like not other time in our history a liveable city that's why we're investing in $253 million in the capital plan to improve our streets and roads make sure that assess with people with disabilities are improved and make sure we were water wise investments and address our drought i want to say thank you, again to the board for helping us and me make inpreened investments in probably the great choice we've had more years and decades have been in the making for avenue, i 7, 8, 9 to thank supervisor farrell and is supervisor avalos in helping me to develop a funding package that invests hundred and $40 million for the new resources to prevent evictions we're not going to stop implementing last week the entire board we're sending to the voters this november the largest affordable housing bopped in the history of the city $310 million bopped that will not race property taxes in san francisco i want to thank every single one of you are for your support and partnership we're going to make sure we fix our public housing and speed up the production of housing and for families and seniors and veterans and, yes we'll fix every elevator we're in charge of; right? to him (laughter) we'll also continue to invest in the diverse neighborhood and community and infrastructure again, thank you again, there's a much i think thanks to go around for the elected officials here but the people that do the hard work on the budget have to present the right stories and the right connections and so i want to peppering give a special thanks to people that are deliberating involved in that budget to make sure that the right facts, the right data presented, that no matter the department asks for we make sure that is connected up with the strong policies of the city i want to say thank you to the controller's office ben rosenfeld and the entire staff for working with kate howard and her entire staff to make sure we're on the right facts, working with, of course, as i said harvey rose and his staff and make sure we work with all of the departments again, i want to thank budget chair supervisor farrell so for his leadership in building a collaborative relationship with the finance committee london breed your leadership is in1r5ub8 because your passionate about a lot of things you care about i know this budget is a strong reflection of the vails you carry with that, please let me have wanting breeding to say a few words and supervisor farrell and going back to work supervisor president london breed. >> (clapping). >> it's a really exciting time in san francisco i'm so honored to be in a position to serve as the board president during a time we didn't have to make any cuts to some of the amazing programs in our community in fact, we're invest more 2, 3, 4 affordable housing and infrastructure and transportation the things that matter to everyday san franciscans so today with this budget is signed by the mayor i'm going to be really excited and rev ready to work with the different departments to spend all the money to improve san francisco thank you all for being here and i also want to say to the budget committee under mark farrell's leadership thank you for your working with members of the board of supervisors to make sure that every single vicinity that every corner of san francisco is impacted in a positive way in this budget it was an amazing collaborative project with harvey rose a lesion he's been doing and work on budget before i was born i love to say that i never thought i would see the day to work with smoking gun someone he's truly an intervention and kate howard the mayors budget director she was amazing i don't know how she makes the numbers work she does a great job i'm excited we've got a lot of work to do your leadership in the san francisco ethics commission through this budgeted demonstrates that we are making changes and making ways to make the city and county of san francisco the best city it can be thank you all for being here supervisor farrell (clapping.) >> thank you london and thank you, mayor ed lee for your leadership you know if there were one theme of this year's theme at the board of supervisors was the affordable the number one issue we dealt with as the board of supervisors during the budget process we were able to make recorded investments we've never seen from at the board of supervisors specifically $25 million as a new affordable housing which tacked on to mayor ed lee incredible efforts for incredible relieve to san franciscans and make sure our city is the diverse city we're able through the process to make sure we had 11 co-sponsors the mayors 3 hundred and step outside the box million dollars affordable housing and the mayor and the board of supervisors i think this year yourself e during our budget process the incredible leaps forward to make sure that san francisco is secure this the future i want to say thank all the people first of all, my bucket committee members vice chair katie tang to supervisor eric mar supervisor wiener and supervisor norman yee thank you and to all my colleagues that played an integral role and harvey rose this is harvey's 44th budget in the city of san francisco so harvey to deborah thank you to you so much to benefit rosenfeld and his incredible team this wouldn't have happened to todd for this and mission bay i michelle and everybody a special, special thanks to kate howard the mirrors budget director it is difficult to over sate how much that of an impact it kate had to mr. cobb and everyone in the marries team and room 2 hundred to my office to justin a margaret to the staff of every single board of supervisors office thank you for your leadership as well is it happens together as a city father and mother and a lot of back and forth and i know this is probable you're most fun time of the year i want to thank you for being in front of us to the treasurer carmen chu our assessor-recorder the follower budget chair that i let take my keys from. >> thank you this is the budget we can be incredibly proud of it faces all the problems and drives the city forward i'm excited to make it happen thanks everybody (clapping.) >> (laughter). >> done everyone. >> yeah. >> this is a regular meeting of abatement appeals board. please turn off all electronic devicesism the first item is roll call. vp clinch, here. commissioner mar, here. commissioner lee, here. commissioner mccray, here, we vaquorum and commissioner waumer and melgar are excused is commissioner mccarthy is expected. the next item on the agenda is item b, the oath. will all parties givingtume today please stand and raise your right hand. do you swear the testimony you are about to give is the truth to the best of your knowledge? thank you, you may be seated. next item is item c, approval of the minutes. >> move to approve. >> i'll second. >> there is a motion and seconds. is there public comment on the minutes? seeing none all commission rs in favor? >> aye. >> any opposed? the minute are apruchbed. next we have item b 1 and b 2. announce for the public and the staff each side has 7 minutes to present their case and immediately following that there will be public comment. item d 1, request for rehering case 68102. shakespeare street decided june 17, 20s 15. action to grachbt request for rehearing. we'll hear from the appellate first. >> good morning. [inaudible] owner of 120 shakespeare. [inaudible] it is a long process, but-the first issue i would like to bring in, i would is a the history of citations information and one thing i would like to be on the record is there is a missing link to this. the information is about the complaint that is-i would like to show it on the screen. i know that you have the copy of this. >> i want to acknowledge commissioner mccarthy joined us. >> thank you. >> now, [inaudible] assumption to this but the complainant has been asking for the [inaudible] last 3 years on the property and he [inaudible] 3500 numerous times and they were all recorded. the fine that [inaudible] constructed a storage house, a detached storage house that is 60 square feet and it is masonry bricks, no foundation what so ever. the allegation is that the owner wants shakespeare street is doing construction without permit. i wonder how she knows without permit. putting all the dirt against the complainant retaining wall, which is a common retaining wall [inaudible] based on that i would like to let you know the storage house which is 60 square feet is about 30 feet away from the retaining wall. [inaudible] no mechanical what so ever. of course that is pretty much addressed by the san francisco building code, which ask defined by the clerk, mrs. [inaudible] california building commission and the code is about 106.2 which is right on the list. it says that less than 120 square feet, there is no need for building permit and also it said [inaudible] that is one of the items. the next one is after citing that then we have a citation of the retaining wall. [inaudible] to the complaints saying that because of the work being done on the storage house it cost the [inaudible] foundation wall and make it unsafe and unstable and about >> to collapse. on the basis, we have absolutely employed the services of structural engineer. i think you have a copy of that. it came from -this is the [inaudible] his aessment is the wall is 4 feet high and it is stable and therefore safe so we just actually [inaudible] to the citation that is on site and unstable and to had point of collapsing. this is performed by a structural engineering, which you can see he is a pe. that is additional evidence. [inaudible] what is said about the retaining wall. on the other hand, under 60106 a.2 which is embraced by san francisco and approved by the california building standard commission is that it is a 4 feet high and under the provision which is i think embedded under the 2013 california building codes which is part of the ordinance approved by the state which is -there is a particular ordinance approved for that and it is saying a wall not above 4 feet high is exempt from the building permit. that is what we have at this point. um, i'm not supposed tosay this because this actually-just for sake of the records is that, [inaudible] has taken a very [inaudible] decision. he called me the [inaudible] i don't want to [inaudible] for the city. why don't we just make building applications? on that basis we have a investigation report and the investigation report is clear the retaining wall is also 4 feet high and i have a copy of the investigation report as well quh which i believe you don't have it and also for the structural engineer it is 4 feet high. to my understanding based on experience and so on, what we submit today the building inspection is pretty much compliant, so we had the soil investigation report and structural design, everything that is needed, details and section squz so on. i can sow some information about the structural design which is performed by a structural engineer. then zee the soil investigation report and then we have all the information about [inaudible] and so on which i believe is secondary to that. it was denied for some reason and i think that is within the review and when we asked for-the reason why >> sorry that is your 7 minutes but want to for the records point out the point of this agenda item is state new evidence we would then decide if we rehear the issue. for the record your new evidence is-what is the new evidence? >> the new evidence is the structural engineer investigation report that the retaining wall is stable on the site. >> okay >> and also the additional information is the agreement between the sit a and the state of california with regards of enforcement of 106 a.2 which is supposed to be enforceable with the city of san francisco. >> thank you. now we'll hear from the department and decide if we rehear the case and if we do there will be more time to discuss the particulars. >> thank you so much for your time . >> the department has 7 minutes, right? >> yes. >> good morning. [inaudible] i'm not hearing any new evidence that would likely change your decision that you made at the last hearing so i have no further comments. >> inspectorhension or mr.hension, i wasn't here for the june meeting, is it correct that the small structure is roughly 30 feet from the wall or is it on top of the wall? >> we acknowledged at the last hearing that the permit filed if that is issued when the inspector goes out under thar permit and verified that the shed is no longer there, it or less than 100 feet we accept that as the solution so we are not taking issue with the shed at this time. >> commissioner mar >> put aside the shed issue is the issue the retaining wall needs to be rebuilt ? i think part of the new evidence is the engine ering report sayatize isn't in empinant danger of collapse and is the departments positions that it was in eminent danger of collapses >> that is wiey give time to repair it or we build it. >> if you look at the engineering report that they included for today dated july 27 of this year, it clearly states item b, inclusion and suggestions. new engineered 4 feet high retaining with adequate footing is recommended. that is completely supports the decision that was made by you at the lasthering >> that is the position department, but that is our position still-the main issue is the retaining wall, not the shed? >> yes, exactly. >> thank you. is there public comment? sorry, seeing none, is there a motion or i can make a motion? >> we move that we [inaudible] >> i second that we grant the rehearing. >> based on? >> based on the evidence of the the engineers report. >> there is a motion to grant the rehearing. do a roll call vote. commissioner-vice precedent clinch, yes. commissioner mccarthy, yes. commissioner lee, yes. commissioner mccray, yes. commissioner mar, yes. that motion carries unanimously. on to item 2, possible rehearing of case sickt 802, 120 shakespeare street. action requested by appellate who seeks reversal of abatement. the appellate can come up. >> this is a 7 minute? >> saechb 7 minutes and 3 minute for rebuttal time >> what the building department mentioned about a letter b soph the structural engineering report and this is a little small but it was shown on the definition. the second paragraph is only a recommendation, it has nothing to do with what is the general findings and observation during the inspection. now, the same recommendation was built in by the soil engineer so that can not be used against the property because it is only a recommendation and what is mentioned in the report is that whatever you have there is part of the norm lal wear and tear when it comes to structure and doesn't pose a safety hazard at this point. thank you very much. >> thank you. the department has 7 minutes. >> just for clarification to the city attorney, should i represent our original report or should i just act as rebuttal? >> the board has granted rehearing based on the new efds they are interested hearing about the new evidence at issue. >> thank you. just to comment on the engineering report, it acknowledged that the height of the wall is 4 feet, therefore a permit is required to deal with that retaining wall. item 2 on the report, due to existing lateral soil pressure the top layers of the retaining wall are pushing out of [inaudible] so, any retaining wall that is pushing out of plumb is a hazard and needs a permit to repair it or replace it. and then the conclusions we mentioned earluritem b and item a is approach saying the existing retaining wall shall be structurally repaired sooner better than laterment when you take all those comments not from our engineer, from his engineer it is clear that the decision you made at the last hearing was correct and this information that is newly presented further supports that you made the right decision at the last hearing and would hope that you would uphold your previous good decision. thanks. >> mr.hension are you very familiar with the conditions out there? did you go out there or did somebody else? >> there were a number of people from the department went out there originally when the noits of violation was issued and shortly before the last hearing 2 staff were out there also. >> if i can ask a question from the engineering perspective, is the high side of the wall, is it hard scape or planted area? >> there is a photograph-let's see. the neighboring side of the wall there is a much greater height drop off. >> it looks like the down hill side is concreate, but i'm curious about the up hill side. this appears to be it here. ya. the appellate before us today is which side of the wall? >> um, that looks like if you take a look at this picture here, so that picture there is from the neighbors side and you can see there is a major crack there and if i was the neighbor i wouldn't like to be looking at that. in fact, the neighbor has filed a permit also so in the event that the appellate doesn't move forward, the neighbor also has a permit filed so that they can move forward sothey don't continue to look at this and have this hazard impended upon their patio. >> okay. >> also for the record, the neighbor has already got a order of abatement relating to this condition so they were willing to consider abatement on their property and the cost associated with that knowing that they are not entirely the cause of this problem, but they were willing it do that to show good faith that they are a cooperating neighbor. >> commissioner mar >> the permit they called was to repair the retaining wall? >> yes. >> any other questions from the commissioners? >> um, is the permit that the neighbor pulled, how long do they have to-what is a time limit on the permit? >> 30 day order. >> 30 days. >> thank you. now the appellate has 3 minutes for rebuttal. >> is there public comment first? >> before rebuttal? >> public comment and rebuttal 3 minutes. >> i believe you asked about what is behind the retaining wall which is inside the property of the owner. this is the-behind the fence and that is actually 25 feet from where the storage shed was actually contracted so i can show that to you. that is a storage shed that was constructed and it was removed and the first citation which is 102 was removed straight away so leaving the retaining wall issue in tact. now i believe the picture that was actually showed to you is pretty much the blown up area of the cracking and the issue of any out of plumb, [inaudible] significant beyond tolerance then you can say it is structure issue but we have a structural engineering saying the property based on his expertise and license that it is stable and safe. now, i wanted to show the actual picture of the retaining wall, not just the portion that was a little --this view is actually taken from the neighbor. that is the front elevation and this is the side view which i believe is a little closer. as yoi can see recollect it is out of plumb-sorry? >> lower it. >> there you go. as you can see the retaining wall is what the engineer said is stable and safe and if there is any-[inaudible] he say that on the report that there is no diagonal cracking that will actually make it truly unstable so based on the [inaudible] of the structural? gen ear it is stable and based on what they said, which is the department, the person who performed the inspection [inaudible] i'm not trying to put the person down because it is his job between the qualification of this inspector citing that it has a structural [inaudible] even some other engineering in the electrical or they don't comment on something that is structural, so here we are and have this structural report that says it is safe and stable. thank you. >> thank you. any public comment? seeing none. any questions from the commissioners? >> [inaudible] >> we haven't, you are right. >> don, do you have rebuttal? >> just one other item then on the report they presentsed. item 4, there was no drainage system to leave the water behind the retaining wall out so that is a further example of where this talk of [inaudible] coming back, if we have a lot of rain you can have a major sur charge of water and further impending the retaining wall and wouldn't like to be the neighbor on the other side. thank you. >> commissioner mar. >> i have a question. so, john, the other neighbor has taken out a permit to repair the wall and also receive the notice of violation so our opposition this wall needs to be rebuilt again like mentioned sooner better than later so it is the opposition both neighbors are responsible for that wall, is that why we gave both neighbors the nlv? >> yes and i would anticipate if both neighbors cooperate they would take the permit that the neighbor filed, they would use their own permit and use one of them to remedy the situation and that would clear the retaining wall issue on both properties >> the neighboring property the retaining wall has no other issues with the caish of the palt there are 2 issues there is a shed and the retaining wall, so it was a neighbors permit and it clears the retaining wall issue. the appellate would still need to get a permit deal wg the shed that that was removed. if the appellate used their permit they are taking care of the retaining wall issue and theshed so that permit clears it entirely >> i thought we taurked earlier about the shed and someone said it was below 120 square feet. >> at the time of the violation it exceeded 100 square feet. we were in good faith that if they have this permit issued it was just enough for the inspector to look that retaining wall and look to make sure the shed is reduced in size or removed. >> commissioner mccarthy. >> it is probably more to the appellate, if you decide not to -i'm a bit confused here, if the other neighbor is willing to do the work recollect are you willing to do this work or repair-i do understand your argument in regards to structural engineer that it is safe and it is not a unsafe wall. are you going to object to the other neighbor fixing that wall? >> as a matter of fact, we discussed that with 3 4 f1 we were not given a answer. the only answer is we were given a 3307 remove ing the foundation from the neighbors side as part of the common property and that only pertains to protection of the neighbors property and also giving him 10 days s before construction. out of that we were denied but we agreed to go for construction of the retaining wall. now, do so that we have to remove the foundation it means the neighbor is not going to take anymore [inaudible] as far as construction of the wall is concerned so that is what it is all about. as i said [inaudible] is willing and we discussed this many timed and have dmun communications and we agreed and- >> you answered the question, so just if you can answer this--are you willing to participate in fixing the wall? have you got the finances to do it or you don't? you are agreeing to fixing the wall but you don't have the financialing to do it? >> that is what we told the neighbor is we are willing to fix the wall but you have to give us the time to [inaudible] our financing. >> thank you. that's my only question. >> [inaudible] >> we have to [inaudible] our time here. any other questions from the commission or public comment? i think- >> i have a quick question from the appellate. since you are will toog do the wall with the neighbor, what would be a reasonable amount of time? what the reasonable amount of time mr. hui will need to cooperate with the neighbor to fix the wall because you said they need more time, what is that time? >> it is brt the financing side but we have completed the sign and so on and provided a copy to the neighbor saying this is what we have, but the main problem we have that according to the [inaudible] he wanted all the foundation that is supposed to be between on her side to be moved on our side and we have to revise the structural design i that increases the cost of construction. [inaudible] he is not going to share it. that is the point of the review is. >> it seems to me 2 or 3 month is enough to do that. i think 2 to 3 months ought to be enough time to do what you kibeed described to get the revised design and calculations done and submit ted to the city for permit. >> the question we have is the neighbor willing to share the cost with us. >> that isn't before us. >> it is mandated under civil code 841 and common ownership so we deal with the cost involved and we are willing to do that. we will construct the wall provided they share the cost. >> any other questions from the commission? it is my opinion that the wall, the engineers report says the wall is fine that moment but should be replaced. is there a recommendation? i think we should support the engineer said letter but think it is reasonable to give more time than 30 days so it is my opinion that something along theorder of 3 months is reasonable. john stol my thunder with elnino and they are talking about a lot of rain and so water will pond. the wall has been there for a long time but don't know if there are conditions modified over the life of the wall that could make it more vulnerable at the time so i'm agree fl wall to be replaced but think it is reasonable for 3 monthss. my motion is uphold the order of abatement but allow 3 months for the work to be done. >> second. >> clarify, is 90 days? >> i have a question for the department and maybe the city attorney about this motion. if we prove it would that also apply to the neighbor because it seems like it is a common wall so if they are work on it we say this person has 3 mupth months and that person has 30 days? >> the neighbor has an abatement of issue so they are a are on the same terms >> so they are given the 3 months as well? >> no, it is irrelevant because the order of abatement is previously issues so if you issue a order now both neighbors have a order of abailtment pending upon them. >> we are saying the nar is getting a permit and pull the permit and will rebuild the wall so in 90 days that will be a new wall. mr. hui doesn't have do deal with it or is the argument then between them about who pays for that wall because we are making the neighbor rebuild it right away? >> i assume only one of the 2 permits we move forward. they will have to cooperate. the neighbors not going to build the wall without having some agreement with the appellate and vice versa. >> that was the just of my question, if we give one person 9 odays and the other 10 days to get it done, it seems like the fire is under the person with the 10 day limit. >> the other neighbor hasants complied yet and it doesn't have much impact other than we could send it the to the sinty attorney but we won't do that if they are cooperating so i don't see a problem there if you go ahead. >> there is a motion and second. >> we have a motion and second. do a roll call vote. >> restate the motion uphold the order of abatement for 907 days to give the appellate additional time to increed the work. >> [inaudible] >> it includes the [inaudible] this is only with respect to the retaining wall, the additional 90 days. >> yes. >> vice president clinch, yes. commissioner mccarthy, yes. commissioner mar, yes. commissioner lee, yes. commissioner mu curry, yes. the motion carries unanimously. item a, general public comment. is there general public comments not on the egenda? seeing none, item f, adjournment. is there a motion to adjourn? >> adjourn. >> second. >> all in favor, we are now adjourned. it is 955 a.m. i have a brief recess and reconvene at the building inspection commission. thank [dog barking] [rocket whistles] [boom] >> good morning. today is wednesday august 19, 20s 15. this is regular meetding of building inspection commission. i would like to remind everyone to fern off all electronic gises. the first item is roll call. president mccarthy, here. vice president mar, here. commissioner lee, here. commissioner mccray, present. commissioner clinch, here. commissioner mill gar and walker are excused. we have a quorum and the next item is president announcements >> good morning everybody and thank you for attending the august 19, 2015 meeting. i have some comments from president announcements. congratulations to director hui and dbi executive team which is finalizing the department plan setting dpoles and [inaudible] join the next current and coming fiscal your. the strategic blan will be post odthen internet as a standing guide for all staff and will help to improve our efficiency and effectiveness as a department. thank you to director hewee and dbi which are party of mayors city wide effort to prepare for impacts from the celebrations tie today the superbowl which will take place laet jan, early november. dbi's role is alert contractors for building projects that may be effected by any superbowl treat closures and other activities that can disrupt building supplies and require schedule modifications mptd thank you to inspector alert leonof the electrical inspection division who was helpful in assisting a customer. he gave the customer a care package to follow and helped close the case [inaudible] inspector cristmer greaty who received a letter from a customer thanks him for his assistance rchlt we encourage if you have a good experience to write in and that experience be sknoe. kudos from [inaudible] who received a letter of appreciation for their work and excellent service in the field. finally, special thanks to ron tom and the dbi response cordsination team who are preparing for rehushal operation to enable staff to train and improve preparation responsive skills so they are ready for it next big earthquake. dbi employee recognition members met, reviewed nomination jz for dbi's quarter of quarter 2 of 2015 and selected code enforcement daniel hendrix. daniel was nouminated by 2 different dxr bi star for #c3ustmer service skills. for her impress chb skill sets and understanding code enforcement and process. congratuless to danielle and those who nominated her and dii's enforcement team. that conclude my announcements. >> thank you. danielle, would you like to come forward? vice president mar has a certificate. >> danielle and on behalf of the commission we would like to thank you for your great work and congratulate you on being elected as employee of the quarter. >> thank you. >> get a photograph there of the nominees. >> for the news letter. >> congratulations. >> thank you. if you want to say a few words you more than welcome. >> i just want to say thank you for the recognition, it means a lot to me and every day i just strive to be the best at the department of building inspection. thank you. >> we are happy to have you, thank you so much. >> thank you is there public comment on the presidents announcements? seeing none item 3, general public comment. bic will take pub luck comments on malters within the jurisdiction not part of this ajenlda. seeing none item 4. discussion and possibly action to approve and square in a member of the code advisory committee. appointment recommended is jonathan rod regs seat the exspire [inaudible] reviewed by the nomination subcommittee at r also may consider include robert [inaudible] and bill [inaudible] >> commissioner mar doia want to take the lead on this? >> commissioner lee, commissioner mar, you keep quite. there we go. >> nomination subcommittee met i guess about 10 days ago and interviewed all 3 candidates at the committee meeting and each candidate had their own strength and what we appreciate is this coming forward and volunteering their time to be on the committee. we selected jonathan rod rige to be on the committee. we felt that his background and resume was unique as being a attorney and working with people in the industry. we felt that characteristic wasn't on the committee and felt that is a good thing to have on the committee so we nominate to appoint jonathan [inaudible] to the seat at large on the members of the cac. >> second. >> is there any commissioners comment regarding that? >> so, if we just do the nomination then we make the comments then, correct? >> is there any public comment on this item? then commissioners discussions, if there is any or we just go ahead and vote? >> i just want to echo. i'm excited for you to sit on the city and great qualifications. thank you for serving. >> if there is no pub luck comment we'll do a roll qual call vote on the item. president mccarthy, yes. vice president mar, yes. commissioner lee, yes. commissioner mccray, yes. commissioner melgar is excused. commissioner clinch, yes. that motion carries unanimously. we now accept it. >> if you would like to say a few words. welcome and thank you so much. >> thank you commissioners and i'm very excited about this appointment and very excited about doing everything i can to help out with the code development in san francisco. my resident here since 1992 with a family iving in the [inaudible] of the city and i have been in and out of the department of building inspection many times for various reason yz got to know lot of the people there. i'm very eager and excited about actually being part of looking at the code development that is unique to san francisco and beading a leader in code development. i will say that as much as we do, it does have not only benefits but impact state wide and country wide. we look at what we did with the destination based elevator systems in the abo 90 and the hard work we did. i remember writing the first draft and thinking this will take a few munt but there a lot of stake holder squz it bexha california building code for the state of california and thipg the rest of the country is looking at that as again a plat form for their code development. we can be leaders and think i'm very excited to be part of the committee and appreciate the appointment. >> thank you. >> [inaudible] i forgot to bring in your oath of office and will have to have you come see me one more time soia can be sworn and get your oath of office. thank you. >> thank you and thank you for committee. excellent choice. >> nest item is item 5. discussion and action to swear in a member of the code advisory committee major contractor seat. appointment recommended by the nomination subcommittee is miking chauv rosales seat to expire [inaudible] eligible applicants by the subcommittee that they also may [inaudible] >> at our second meeting as a subcommittee, commissioners we interviewed mr. chavez and he brings to the position of a major project contractor seat just a wealth of experience and background workic with high rises and companies throughout the city and we were excited about his presentation and time with us , so on behalf of the subcommittee we nominate michael chauv vez rks >> i second that. >> any commissioner comment or public comment? >> call the question. >> is dollar there a motion to appoint mr. chauv frz the seat. present mu carty, yes, vp mar, yes. [inaudible] the motion carries unanimously. >> mr. chavs if you would like to say a few wurz you are more than welcome and again, excellent choice here on behalf of the committee. >> thank you, i want to thank the commission and dbi for throwing my name in the hat. i have been in san francisco for 21 years. i met my wife here the first day i worked so i fell in love with the city and wanted to call the city home. in my 21 years san francisco main library was the first project i built, asian art museum. i have been with web corp several years and built several high rises in the city y. have been on the back side of the code changes and challenges they present so i thought it was exciting to be part of the process reviewing codes and looking to the future. i take great pride in the working reslaigzship i have with dbi. it sex citing to be part oaf the process. part of my job is bring the information back and i'm trying to share and mentor some of our newer talent coming along where wl they are project engineers or superintendents that will live and work in the city to come soime rrb excited to be part of the process. thank you >> thank you and thank you for your future service. >> mr. chavez i'll contact you as well about being sworn in. item 6, appeal pursuant to section d.3750-4. appeal by working group [inaudible] represented by zacks and freedman llc. director tom hui's april 24, 2014. pursuant to 17975 of the california health and safety code. discussion and possibly action to adopt written notice of decision and find frgz appeal filed by working dirt llc. note the item was heard by the building inspection commission at july 15, 2015. at that meeting the commission voted to deny the epeal, uphold the director determination of relocation benefits and adopt findings at subsequent meeting. there will be 3 minutes allowed for presentation by the appellate and the department. >> thank you. >> the appellate. >> good monching again commissioners. i appreciate the time that has gone into this and we reavooed the findings. i want to address the finding that relates to the finding this matter results from defeoffered maintenance from conditions that occurred quite some time ago. it appears from reviewing the departments records these conditions existed for as much as 20 yours and yet the order issued on april 3 or 4 didn't nocontain the necessary information for the landlord and tenants to meaning fully department from the property and handle that. the question i have and the owner had is why didn't this happen sooner? why didn't the department not plan for this and why were the amounts not stated in the order issued? the problems we heard about the unfortunate situation the tenant were put in resulted in the 3 week lag between the order isued and the stailt about the relocation benefits issued. the landlord paid thumount they were owed. the tenant believe they were entitled for more and there was a dispute and this could have been avoided on clear [inaudible] within hours of issuing those checks as we heard a lot about, the payment was stopped but the landlord advised the tenants they would dothat and issue new checks which were for more than what the department ordered. in realty the sequence doesn't matter, the tenant received what the department ordered they are paid and the prior owner who was responsible for 15-20 years of this happening is off scott free and perhaps that is what the current owner bought and perhaps that is what he or she or they should have expected but from our perspective the owner bought this property in mid-jan applied for permits, the deapartment gave a permit, the owner noticed the tenants to relocate. the owner stepped in and did that on its own. the owner attempt today do everything he could. it merely lacked dweckz from this department. there was no reason why the department couldn't have given that direction and from our perspective the non compliance resulting with the health and safety code could have been avoided and perhaps nothing will be done but all we ask is the future the department consider some regulations, the city consider regulations so that landlords and tenant will be better off in this situation in the future. thank you. >> thank you. members of the commission, good morning romary bosky chief housing inspector. i want to commend the commission for a rather extensive hearing on this issue. at the big hearing-i will indicate that early in february the housing inspector assigned to this case, network #re79s of the property ouner handed every notice of violation out standing at the time and walked through the property with them so there was effort on our part early in the process when the property owner bault bought the property to answer questions they may have and insure they were well aware of what was going on and at that point in time since there were notice of violation they had the opportunity to see chapsed ceilings. with that we believe with the testimony you received and the staff reports that we submitted that we completely support the findings as they have been indicated to us. thank you. >> is there public comment on this item? commissioner discussion? >> commissioner did you want to say anything? i concur with the report and do concur with regards to the representative from zacks freedman. prestigeerally i think we could have handled this better. going forward do we have a more better way of if we have a situation like this again we have a more direct way of itemizing and quantifying these type of expenses that a property owner may incur as policy going forward? >> yes, tom hui department oaf building inspection. as you are a weir this is the first case we have and will work close with the city attorney and knh xh come up with a better procedure. >> we have learned a lot to this and to the credit of the property owners lawyer, if this comes in front of us again i will be not as lenient on the department how we get to the the solutions here. i think it is very important we have a written and clear policy and think the report gives us that and want to thank the city attorney for giving this report. other than that it is just a comments looking to the future. >> commissioner mar. >> i would concur with president mccarthy's remarks. the other thing is, i don't think this is the first time we dealt with very long standing problems where the previous landlord chooses to deal with it just by selling the property, so i'm not sure if it is just within the purview of this department. maybe there needs to be stronger legislation or something because unfortunately given the market and what it is, there is nothing to stop people from selling a building in any condition. also, some people will buy it under any condition. yes, i think we could have moved better on how long the nov lasted from the previous owner but don't know how to resolve this thing about. we have said to the new owners who come before us, you bought the mov's and should have known when you bought that building you bought the mov's and those tenants in a way. that is the problem. while there were unique things about this case in terms of the scope, i don't think it is that unique for those problems which people sold the mov's because they don't want to deal with it and sold the problemwise the tenants because they don't want to deal with it. i don't know if the dbi can deal with that other than the fact we are saying you bought those. you should have known you bought that you inherited it. >> next steps, do we need to vote on-- >> wree voting to adopt-the motion is adopt the proposed findings dating august 19, 2015. is there a motion to adopt the findings? >> i move we adopt the findings. >> is there is a second? >> second. >> there is a motion and a second. do a roll call vote. public comment , sorry. public comment on the findings >> my name is jerry [inaudible] when we issued a civil grand jury report on dbi and a findings is some of the dbi divisions didn't collect the fees when [inaudible] i would like taknow if that is remedyed because that is something that would address this problem. thank you. >> thank you. you have been very vaurfbed and had meetings in the past. i would make the argument we are doing a lot better. a lot better. that said, we still have outstanding issues on nov's and collecting the fees. as we find out these problems i think we addressed them very speedily but if you have any other cases that say we are not getting better i'm interested in hearing them >> i think the [inaudible] is a solution to the problem once the data is available to the general public and it is-the old saying sun light sadis infectant is true. i think not to be negative, but ones view of acceptable isn't necessarily the same as another persons view. progress is important, but still if we are falling way short of the goal we are still way short of the goal. thank you >> thank you for your comment and to your point and think with our new computer system this should help and look forward to you coming to us and letting us know. >> i look forward to the discussion later in the meeting on accela. >> any other public comment? seeing none, roll call vote on the motion. presidents mccarthy, yes. vp mar, yes. commissioner lee, yes. commissioner mccray, yes. commissioner clinch, yes. the motion carries unanimously. item 7, update on dbi policy regarding decks and balcony. >> good morning commissioners, ron tom assistant director of department of building inspecting. last month we were tasked to provide a overview of departments effort to address the issue of balcony and deck safety. the balcony failure in [inaudible] decks balconys and other building elements. those includes stairs, [inaudible] despite the cities marine environment. dbi records of the past 5 years show very few ins dochbs deck, balcony and stair failures. the currents permit tracking system doesn't contain a data bis that provides nrfgz on specific building features such as balany decks stairs and fire escapes. we have existing building code sections that require [inaudible] like the projections of wood frame construction. they also require water flow management. if there is a impervious that exceedss 200 square feet the drainage has to be taken back towards and into the drainage system of the building. unlike jurisdictions outside the city drain water [inaudible] terminated on a splaush block generally prohibited. we do have a housing code section 6 04 and applies to hotels that have balconys stairs fire escapes [inaudible] and inspected every 5 years. that is the responsibilities of the building owner. under section 604 the owner retained the service of a license general contractor, a license pest control inspector, license architect or civil or structural engineer. those parties have to complete a affidavit and submit to the department. the submittal could be done by e-mail and we accept digital signatures. move on to the outreach efforts. we are taking full advant squj plan to take advantage of radio and television interviews, press relaces and other media such as social media. we currently have in our site on the dbi website information sheet number s 10. that is currently available and it is signed by the director and included in this s 10 is the section 604 requirements and the compliance affidavit. additionally, we've utilize thd website since very recently and we now feature a website page on deck safety. all is a screen shot. if you click on this, it will take you to the page that specifically needs you-through the elements and content of the inspection of residential balcony and safety and deck safety. contained at the bottom of this page is a link. and that link is the 7 on your side hosted by michael finny, very familiar figure in the bay yiria. that is a 2 minute clip and features our director showing how a person even a lay person can begin some of their own inspection by taking a screw driver and doing probing. not just the support elements but the fall protection elements as well because those are exposed and can fail just as much as the deck and structural elements supporting the weight. last june in our news letter we had a feature by director hui and he spoke about deck and balany safety. we are also going to feature a letter this month again on the subject of deck and balany safety. the communications group has been reaching out to bomo, san francisco realsters association, san francisco apartment association and small property owners. we also plan to attend community events and partner with code enforcement outreach organizations. what are our next steps? we are going to assess in plan review how to do training for our staff to reach out to people coming in for over the counter permit where they have deck, balcony and stair repairs and when those issues come up we want our staff to spend a little time and advice the applicant about not only the obligations but insure also that the details necessarily for water management and water proofing are contained when plans are provided. we want to also open a discussion at the code advisory committee and other submities for code change recommendations. during cochbdo conversion we have inspections conducted by staff. we want to issue the affidavit at that time and make it part of the package. we also want to expand the use of the affdivot when we have a notice of violation we'll include it. when we investigate apartment and hotel complaints we'll include it at that point in time and during routine and complaint based inspection, what features we think are applicable we'll provide the affidavit. so, continuing the next steps, we are going to continue our outreach to property owners, contractors and other stakeholders. they include mailing notice reminders to property owners of affidavit requirements. we are start featureing a brown bag where we talk about deck and balcony safety and maintenance. e-mail submitted are available by the property owner and they can e-mail to our department for the affidavit completion and the continuing on the web seat and on line outreach sharing with the news letter. we plan to put a nrgz information board on the 5th floor where we had other green building boards but now we are going to provide one for deck and balcony safety. we also hope to develop a powerpoint presentation that will be streamed on all the different floors where we have monitors which we currently show on a rotational basis probably a number of feature of important subject matters like earthquake safety in general. and we'll continue our outreach and partnering with organizations and stakeholders. commissioners are there any questions? >> commissioner mar, we'll start with you. >> i want to thank you for this. i think it is important that the department get ahead of these problems, but i have a problem because this deck and balcony has something that we have been dealing with and dealt with it as a nov and in litigation. for example, there was a clearly illegal deck in a neighborhood that i was aware of and the reason we got such heat about it is because the neighbors were calling me complaining about the illegal deck. we did everything we right. we filed the nov and moved it up as quickly as possible to director hearing and it finally got to the city attorneys office which i think is where it still sits. the problem is this illegal deck and unsafe deck which the neighbors didn't know about. the reason they complained is they knew it was built illegally but what they were complaining about is this apartment building was rented mainly to callling students so every friday and saturday night this deck was party central so that was the main concern and why i got these phone calls and finally i put heat on our code enforcement and finally the city attorneys office. the bottom line is, it is still there. this is one of these owners. the deck is still there and so august is rolling around where there will be a new host of college students moving into this apartment building and there will be the friday, saturday night goings on again. it is these things where unfortunately with the berkeley situation, if that tradagy didn't happen, that deck would have been probably still there and it would probably still be used and this is what is happening with this deck. i know the city attorney is moving on it because i called them on it, they are pushing it and putting as much heat as possible on the property owner financially and all that, but the bottom line is, the deck is still there and if the deck is still there and the young people in the building are attracted to it obviously. i was wondering if there is anything the department can do? it is like the previous discussion about nov, there are intransit owners that's will not deal with the nov so is there a way to say this deck is red tagged andiocannot use this deck? put a ply wood door on the deck because it is unsafe to walk out there. short of that, i don't know how we'll prevent people from walking on that deck. we don't have that right now. >> commissioner mar, i really appreciate not only bringing this to our attention but also the concern as a individual. we will all be remiss if anything should happen. in this situation i think first of all in this particular case where it is now perhaps our department can make contact with city attorneys office and get a response and convey our concern about the conditions that can potentially endanger people. injury and death in the wirs case scenario. for future conditions like this, i think what we need to do is insure for the public as well as for the commission that we do everything in a timely fashion. what that means is we don't put it under a pile. it takes a priority and moves to the top of the pile and we have continued oversight and high level within the department all the way to the executive level to insure that everything that we legally and administrative processes can do we'll do quickly and hold the and schedule a hearing as soon as we can. but, we are faced from time to time with this dulima as a department over many many years. this is one that escalated because we know it can endanger lives. in other situations where we know we have people who thumb their nose at the process in place, this is a process we had to try to address but with very great difficulty and know it is right in front of us, but someone in their own volition says well, i'm going to not do what you require me to do. what are you going to do about it? it is something that needs to have a greater open discussion and it takes on the effort of more than just our department alone. we would initiate the process and we can watch over it and shepherd it best we can but probably needs a greater discussion on higher level and engaging other agencies as well. i don't have the magic bullet to provide but i have taken note of it, everyone hear heard it, the directors heard and we'll definitely bring it back for discussion and we'll get back it the commission. >> okay. first a question for director hui, does chapter 17such building code require special inspection for water proofing? >> [inaudible] special inspection for water proofing and such because water proofing is not in the inspection needs. >> because everything you presented today or most of what you presented today is about existing conditions but what concerns me is that the balcony collapse in berkeley was a fairly new structure and it points to we don't know the findings but it suggests there was a error in application of the water proofing membrane or fasteners or such. >> i agree with you commissioner. first of all, when i review a case in that particular deck [inaudible] quh you have a hole under you see the water coming down and the water damage won't be much. second thing is they put the water proofing of the concrete on top and further the [inaudible] you don't see the damage there. also, the engineering materials when they have a composite, once you touch the water it detearierates a lot faster than [inaudible] as you are aware. that is what i see from the sheer off and that is sudden failure and overcrowding is another issue in this particular case. that is why we want to go back to improve our code. that is why we are going back to the [inaudible] committee to make sure the regulation under neath the [inaudible] sometimes when we don't have the specification on that we won't to improve in that area and also maybe the material we are thinking about a pressure treated wood or something but want to go through the process. the water proofing is one issue but [inaudible] the water will seep through there. water migration is a big issue >> i agree with everything you said in the sense there is a need for better oversight in the detailing and assembly and that is a difficult one because the dbi is responsible for enforcing the code and the code isn't that explisant on durability which is a life safety issue in this case. i think we can strengthen the requirements our building code for durability issues. 2ndly, i wonder if we can require a special inspection of the water proofing assembly. that would be just making sure that the installation is done right. >> we can talk to the [inaudible] committee, but water proofing is very specialized. >> the manufacturer of the product. >> [inaudible] they do a good job and shouldn't have that type of problem. that why it is a combination. we'll give our inspector [inaudible] >> just to follow through on that, as a part of special inspection criteria we need engineering letters if we did a retaining wall and so on that the department it is in their scope to make sure it is done correctly but the special inspection at the end of the job saying it was done. could the water proofing-i'm cog of the fact we could be over killing there to your director, if it is done roit it shouldn't be a issue, but what would it take to be a part of special inspections in water proofing like for decks where there will be a life safety possibility problem if it isn't done right and we can make it part of the special inspection at the end of job or a letter is sent in saying it was done correctly and all the guided principles how it should be installed was done correctly? >> one thing we can think about but the problem is you have toop find architect or engineer to sign off on it and then how do you find a special guys to sign off on it? who is qualified? [inaudible] >> i gree with everything you said. >> plus at the end of the day when i do a project and i have >> student to bring in a water proofing contractor who specializes in water proofing is because i'm not doing it so why not have a issue of where they can back up their work in some form? i know a engineer has to do it. it is a interesting point he brings up here because the venting was a big problem on the deck and you eluded there was no venting and that is a remedy for disaster. it is something we could-i see mr. rod rige rosales taking notes so if is on it, but it is something we could look at if there is a form of where we as a department feel that little bit better there is another set of eyes on the water proofing and there is a form of communication to the department saying in our opinion this is done correctly and deshould sustain for many years as commissioner was saying this is only a 5 year old deck or 7 or 10 year olds deck which is rel tivly young so something seriously went wrong there. to your point i think that is something we should consider. i don't want to-do you have anymore? commissioner lee? >> yes, i'm curious about what programs we have in place for the smaller buildings? i understand we programs for apartments and hotels but what about single family unit. last mupth we had an abatement appeal case before us which was a rental home and the back deck was deteariated and had to decide to close that off. i'm curious to hear what the plans are for the smaller buildings or is it just all voluntary? >> i think it is a matter of resources related to the numbers. with the apartments there are more people involved and in terms of tenants and we have a housing inspection services division. single family and 2 family dwellings generally fall into the purview of our plan revuiew inspection and building inspection division and the numbers there i think are spread out and all over the city, so it is a matter of developing a database . wrun one of the things we hope to do and think you brought up a excellent point here commissioner lee, we intend to roll out the accela program and expect the project permit tracking system to provide the opportunity to capture features more so than the current permit tracking system. right now basics are the unit count, construction type, height, story count. adding and capturing features like decks and balcony, stairs fire escapes, if we start developing that especially for single family and duplexes perhaps that is where we can over a period of time be able to develop a program that is effective. right now there is only one way to make a determination. you go out and drive out or you make note of it when you do a regular kitchen or bathroom remodel inspection or when you go and search through our records management division to see if there are drawings and then you can verify it. the issue now is we don't have a complete data base available to put together a effective program. i think it is something we definitely want to think about and think you bring up a slnts point. we talked about what are we going to do about the smaller buildings and we'll continue this discussion and i think that is currently perhaps director hui has a problem. >> commissioner lee, to answer your question up to this point there are 1 and 2 family [inaudible] our results can not be [inaudible] we want to concentrate on [inaudible] and also some of the small commercial buildings. there are 2 thing tooz look at, one is a [inaudible] and the other one is a self supported polls and beams to support the back [inaudible] is more dangerous because they have water proofing on top you may not see and that is why we want to capture those-right now this time with the [inaudible] regulation type of construction, water proofing is a issue we want to make sure. the other for single family or 2 unit buildsings that is why we encourage the owner using a screw driver and [inaudible] trying to see themselves. you walk on top of the deck and you feel it isn't safe then you should ask professional opinion to come in and fix it. [inaudible] they should come in to do it right away. that is the advantage thrai v. thereat is why we encourage them for repairing your deck or rear stair or anything, you don't need a plan, you just come in and file a permit and you don't need it go through planning. everyone knows you issue it right away. what we call a [inaudible] that is what we approach to encourage people to get permit and come in sfr small building. the bigger building we want to encourage them to come in [inaudible] how to improve the water proofing situation. water proofing is a issue eerfben 20 or 30 years ago i remember when was outside, evethen roof before they were [inaudible] water migration into the building that is why the roof want a quarter inch per foot otherwise they don't guarantee [inaudible] your water won't come in. it isn't a new things it is a old thing but they come back again and again and we learn from it. >> i see the point where it can be a challenge to document all the balconys and stairs and decks for single family home jz duplex but it is incumbent on the property owners to take a look at their buildings. since the tragied in berkeley, i look around at the build squgz i see small single family homes with whault i call decorative balconys. they are just metal looking balconys and not real bal conys just bolted on the wall and see people standing on them and they are smoking. i have seen a case where they are bbq. maybe single family home people don't know that structure is safe or not and it is incumbent for them to find out. >> thank you commissioners. i just close- >> my comment is a observation. when i received this i saw balcony deck safety and looked at the picture and saw a fire escape, no deck, fire escape and was only in the last comment that we mentioned fire escapes. whatever the codes are i hope we are also including information about having these checked and these kept up to date because they are everywhere and i been thinking balcony and deck and when i saw this i said i have one of those. >> [inaudible] was included. we are going go into all those because they attach to the building with a screw in there. >> that is covered in our section 604. >> to commissioner mars point i am off line and would like to talk about concern to the regards of the other deck and maybe we can talk after the meeting. first of all i want to thank you mr. tom, i asked for this last meeting and wasn't aware you had done so much-work so quick and give such a great presentation today. it is a outstanding first step for the department to be taking and so i'm happy with what you presented here today and feel confident the department is doing everything within their prirfby to do the right thing going forward because now after the tragied that is all we can do is look real hard going forward and how do we do what we need to do to make sure it doesn't happen. [inaudible] to 3 of the families left here and visit with them today. i'll share this with them and say this is your-this tragied is triggering a great awareness this can happen to anyone and will do our part to make sure it doesn't happen in this city. as a part of the policy we are going to do-- >> i believe up to now i haven't shared any of this yet. our housing chief has been in contact with the berkeley representatives and maybe perhaps our communications group has done it, i'm just not aware of it >> i think it is something as soon as you feel is appropriate to do that because--i just to my commissioners points here, i think this is touched everybody so dramatically so if we could and i also want to thank lily, i know she worked hard on this, if we can keep updates how the outreach is going if you feel confident it is getting through. i want tobook you for the buildsers meeting which will come up soon. you mentioned you are outdreaching to the groups and think you do a great job presenting it [inaudible] greater step forward. thank you to the the staff and your hard work. i wasn't expecting this great report so thank you. >> thank you very much on behalf of our staff. it is a team effort and we convene and everybody-what you saw today is a contribution of many people and we just happened to put in a powerpoint presentation but the collective effort of different ideas because everybody has a different take how >> to reach out to people. thank you commissioners with time to share thoughts and concerns about this very important subject that we are not going let it go and continue to pursue the outreach and bringing this into the collective consciousness of building owners. thank you. >> thank you. >> any public comment on item 7? seeing none, item 8, directors report. 8 a, update on dbi finances. >> good morning commissioners [inaudible] deputy dreper for department of bilgdsing inspection and in the packet is july 2015 year to date financial report. given july is the first month of the fiscal year there very limited data so i'll give a brief summary. the revenue there is a slight reduction in revenue, but one percent compared to last year. i see this as being the same what we collected as last year. on the [inaudible] side we are spending slightly more than we did this year last year, however because july is the first month of the fiscal year we are doing a lot of prep rakez for the year so we are setting up contracts and po's and work orders. also i discussed this earlier, july is the month that we use to close out the prior fiscal year so we are doing a lot of close outs and hope we'll be done with the close out of 14/15 and can provide a report next month. happy to answer questions if you have any. >> commissioner mar? thank you for that. just probably a little off topic but the reduced fee in progress? >> yes, the reduced fees are not in progress yet. the legislation is currentsly approved by the board at the last meeting july meeting so we have to wait for a meeting in september so hope it will be effected after the mayors signature so in october so & that is timely because a few months ago we had approval to extend the temporary fee to the end of october. bill strom will have more information about the legislation in his report too. >> thank you deputy. >> item 8 b, propose a enacted state or local legislation. >> mr. stom. >> pub luck comnlt for the directors report will be taken at the end. >> good morning bill stom legislative and public affairs. to deputy director madisons point just a minute ago, the mayors legislation did pass for the budget. it was attach today the full budget for our fee changes and one reading took place so the second reading will take place at the boards fist meeting in september and expect that to pass unanimously and the mayor to sign it that same week so roughly around the week of october 6 or 7 is when we expect new fee tables to go into full effect. as the director mentioned earlier, it is going to be roughly a 10 percent reduction. it will be a little higher than the 7 percent that we have right now. there will be finer gruidations on the evaluations tables as well. that will be fully in place by the middle of october. i know i had more than one conversation with some of their directors staff and berkeley did not have the requirement that we had since 20s 2 where owners are required at least every 5 years to have a engineer or architect reinspect those types of appendages to buildsings subject to climate deterioration and wood root. the new ordinance is fashioned on housing code 6 04 that i and mrs. bosky sent it them. [inaudible] they added a couple additional elements in the adopted code such as pressure treated wood being now a requirement and i believe they will require even more frequent reinspections. i believe what the council decided is every 3 year, which is possible and berkeley was a more limited building supply, that would be very challenging in san francisco given our overall situation. but with that i want to mention too that the mayors legislation for waving plan review fees for building and planning on the legalization of in laws did pass and that will take effect in early september. right now we've issued about 61 or 62 permits on the legalization of in-laws and we'll have to wait and see whether this fee reduction effort may stimulate more interest. you may remember it is a voluntary program and as a consequences we have to wait for people to come to us and then we offer them the advice that they need. other issues that are going arounds supervisor wiener and christensen both have added in the additional dwelling unit opportunity within the existing building envelope. that also will be having a second reading early september and will take effect about the middle of aublt. as a reresult anybody doing a seismic ret row fit if they have space within the envelope of the building to add a dwelling unit. to date we had about 6 percent applications submitted to us. no one has yet been issued and those are in process. we do anticipate and heard from the permit services section this is a very likely source of increased building permit applications in the very near future. i think the only thing i want to menshz mention is there is a piece of legislation supervisor chew introduced, ab 1236. we had a conversation with his staff about that would require the immediate prioritization of review and permit issuance for electric vehicle charging stations. our concern with the legislation didn't have a caveat about life safety to let the building official continue to have the authority prioritize that ahead of a electric charging station. san francisco is already according to mr. chew's aid the gold standard in the state and the reason for the state legislation is to try and get other jurisdiction tooz do what we already do. they did agree to have a discussion and make sure that the health and safety exemption still stands and we are going to have to drop everything to deal with electric vehicle charging staishz if we vahigher life safety priority. with that i'll take any questions. >> thank you so much. >> item 8 c update major projects. >> good morning commission. tom hui department of building inspection. as you see from the [inaudible] compared to last month, roughly increased by.9 percent. [inaudible] any questions you have? >> nope. we have the commerce or [inaudible] still. that is good. >> item 8 b, update on code enforcement. >> good morjing commissioners. dan lowery deputy director inspection services and here to report on code enforcement and monthly update for the month of july. it is very buzzy in the building department if you come by between 730 or 830 you see masses of people. all the inspector squz clerks are really busy. building inspections performed, 5625. complaints received, 348. complaint response within 24-72 hours is 347. complaint with first notice of violation sent is 34. complaints received without notice of evaluation is 185. abated complaints are 54. second notice of violation is 14. that is for building inspection division. for housing inspection services, housing inspection is 947. complaints received is 355. complaint response within 24-72 hours is 353. complaints with notice of violation issued is 1ten. abated complaints is 392. number of cases sent tothe director is 17. routine inspection is 145. code enforcement services number of cases sent were 48. number of aboughtments issued is 13. number och cases undrb advicement are 4. number of cases abated are 7 twampt code in enforcement performed is 159. cases referred to the [inaudible] were 2. other thereisologist graphs attached to give you a outlook for the past year for these complaints. thank you. >> thank you deputy. >> any public comnlt on the directors report items 8 a-d? >> my name is jerry dratler. my first comment is that historically notice of violation is a problem specifically the time required to clear them. my suggestion on the directors report will be that the revenue section would show the neb of nov's out standing this year versus the same period last year. also the number of nov's over 12 munts olds so we can see if there is progress made. secondly, with respect to the revenue that is required it be collected for nov's that run beyond the normal abatement period, i would like to see nat revenue broken out separately this year versus last year. it speak tooz chairman mccarthys point of view that progress is made but you can't see it and if it was shown as revenue we could see if it was substantial. my second point deals with activities versus outcomes. it may seem like a fine point but let's say you and i have a children and recorded if they went to school or not and whether they did homework, those are actirfbties. outcomes is did they learn anything and graduate. what i see us doing is reporting a lot of activities, things we did, but we don't report outcomes and think outcomes should be the focus of the bick. management is managing activities but see what the outcomes are. the third point is a question on the 3 million dollars of expenned in the first period for community based organizations. thank you. >> thank you for your comments. >> any additional public comment? >> deputy director you don't have to come up, we have that data of this year versus last year would we? why don't you come back. just to the comments there. >> i'm not sure if i understand all the comments but on the revenue report we yooyuss specific accounting codes so nrd for us to getthality nrgz that is information that you get from a report from different division if that actually happened. because he is looking more not on the revenue he want said to know on each specific case what is happening on that case and whether or not it is going forward is that correct? maybe i didn't understand your question. >> what i'm interested seeing is some oaf the divisions were not collecting that and i'm interested seeing the total or aggregate amount of revenue that isect collected for nov's that run 60 or 90 days past the abatement period where there is a monthly fee and there were some division collecting zero and some doing a good job. if we can see the total and also we could see the number of nov's we can make judgments about if you have 4 thousand nov's over a year old and collect 120s dollars it doesn't look like we are doing much >> i'm trying to get to is it possible to answer that. >> probably something the department will have toget back on because it isn't a agendized item. >> ya. >> so, i'm sorry i wasn't clear before. the information probably exists but outside the financial program so there has to be a way to merge the data together. when we collect for permits i cannot tell you how much money we collect on a bundle of permits. we do things on accounting code so maybe we need to get together internally to figure if that is something that with can be done and reflected in the revenue report because that is based on high lechbl. it may be a separate notice of violation report. >> commissioner mar >> i want to clarify for my own standing for the fees. if nov's are issued a lot of times the fees actually require recorporation of staff time and cost, so for example if housing is recoperating more of those costs, we would want to know that versus let's say the sections of the building department where there is leckical plumbing or mechanical, if they have a nov on a building problem or lack of permit problem we want to knee their staff time that recoperating this. is that right? we are looking for the tolet total to see where the staff time is getting recoperating. >> hement wants to make sure the fees are collected so if we have 100 nov's we should have x number of dollars. that is what we are trying to figure out and i'm with him on that because that is something the grand jury focused where we have-it was like a million something dollars that we couldn't account for that wasn't collected. i would make the argument we are a lot better now because we are focusing on nov and collecting the fees and bringing them forward. >> actually thank you. we were a divisioned by the jand jury collect ing the fees. we are talking about not a penalty but assessment of cost for the hourly rate and have a complete accounting of that because we have the lean cycle where the property owner hasn't paid them. we originally had about 800 thousand dollars bnch the board recollect people came in and paid those and it reduce today 600 thousand but that information specific to each of the cases so there is a complete accounting of that. in housing we do a hourly billing that support the letter the property owner gets with a total so if not just the 52 dollars the monthly fee is just doing the inspection and issuing the notice and reinspection. we have a complete accounting of that it is in the shape of assessment of cost and once the board of supervisors adopt that for those in arequire t is recorded on the praurnt tax bill and appears as code 55 in the special assessment section of the tax bill. there is a complete accounting from when we issue the first bill for assessment of cost all the way to if they haven't paid and it is recorded on the property tax so we have that information going back 20 years with about 35 cases in the late 90's so we have all that data. >> commissioner mar has a comment there. >> it was related about a different topic than the fee. >> it isn't about the million dollars which is significant but it is also about the earlier issue of nov's notd being addressed by property owners and dbi using all the tools in their arsenal to do that. if that procedure is outlined by the deputy dreblter is follow than the property owner will see that and there will be a financial incentive not to let this run. right now there are no significant penalties for just gaming the system. >> okay. deputy i just-please tell me if you do this

Related Keywords

Sacramento , California , United States , Maine , Rincon Hill , Oakland , Embarcadero , San Francisco , Los Angeles , Caesar Chavez , Jason Moody , Mary Maguire ,