City and County of San FranciscoDepartment of Building Inspection

Building Inspection Commission


2009 2008 2007 2006 2005 2004 2003 2002 2001 2000 1999 1998 1997 


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

REGULAR  MEETING
Monday, December 4, 2006 at 9:00 a.m.
City Hall, 1 Dr. Carlton B. Goodlett Place, Room 400
Aired Live on SFGTV Channel 78
ADOPTED FEBRUARY 5, 2007


MINUTES

 

The regular meeting of the Building Inspection Commission was called to order at 10:05 a.m. by President Walker.

 1.

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

 

COMMISSION MEMBERS PRESENTS:

 

Debra Walker, President
Joe Grubb, Commissioner

Criss Romero, Commissioner (9:10 a.m.)
Michael Theriault, Commissioner

Frank Lee, Vice-President
Mel Murphy, Commissioner
Ephraim Hirsch, Commissioner

 

Ann Aherne, Commission Secretary

 

D.B.I. REPRESENTATIVES:

 

Amy Lee, Acting Director

Carla Johnson, Acting Deputy Director

Wing Lau, Deputy Director

Taras Madison, Chief Administrative Officer

Bill Strawn, Communications Manager

Rosemary Bosque, Chief Housing Inspector

Laurence Kornfield, Chief Building Inspector, Technical Services Division

Raymond Lui, Manager, Structural Safety & Emergency Management Division

Alan Tokugawa, Technical Services Division, Secretary to the CAC

Sonya Harris, Secretary

 

CITY ATTORNEY’S OFFICE REPRESENTATIVES:
John Malamut, Deputy City Attorney

 2.

President’s Announcements

 

President Walker announced the Joint Meeting of the Building Inspection Commission and the Planning Commission to take place on Thursday, December 7, 2006 beginning at 6:00 p.m. at City Hall in the Board of Supervisor’s Chambers. President Walker said that the meeting would deal with the coordinated efforts of Building and Planning around permitting and activities that the Departments do together to better coordinate the Departments and the processes.

President Walker stated that in the next few months the BIC would be looking at the appointments to the various Committees under the BIC, such as the Access Appeals Commission (AAC), Board of Examiners (BOE), Code Advisory Committee (CAC) and the Unreinforced Masonry Committee (UMB). President Walker said that the Code Advisory Committeee would be very active in the next few months as the State is in the process of adopting a new set of International Codes and the Committee would be looking into how to integrate that the Department’s local application of the Code. President Walker asked for interested parties to contact the BIC Secretary.

 

 3.

Director’s Report.

 

a. Status of MIS.

Acting Director Amy Lee said that the Department had issued an RFP and was now in the process of waiting for bids with an issuance by the end of December.  Ms. Lee said that other City agencies had been involved with the process and said that a group of panelists were finishing up the ratings on the submitted bids.  Ms. Lee said that in terms of the Departments infrastructure the migration to a more recent version of Oracle is finishing up and new desktops would probably be rolling out this week.  Ms. Lee stated that the full roll out would be completed to all staff within the next two months.  Ms. Lee said that changes have been made to DBI’s website and there is now a GIF integration so when people do a search they will be able to visually see the properties.  Ms. Lee said that customers would soon be able to query plumbing and electrical permits in the same manner as building permits that could be queried now.  Ms. Lee reported that Planning and DBI have been meeting frequently to get a fully integrated system.  President Walker said that the computer systems would be an item discussed at the Joint Planning Commission and Building Commission meeting.

b. Performance Statistics.

Acting Director Lee reported that there is still a significant backlog, but said that in major projects the backlog has been decreased from 24 to 17 days and in residential it has gone down to 3 days.  Ms. Lee said that commercial plan check had been reduced from 9.6 days to 5.1 days.  Ms. Lee stated that the Department is now starting to see the fruits of new staff that have been trained and are now familiar with the processes.  Ms. Lee said that it is still difficult to keep up with the new permits coming in and said that in October the Department received 3, 371 permits and approved 3,231.

Ms. Lee stated that last month there were about 11,000 inspections done and said that there was an increase in activity as people are trying to get things done before the wet weather.  Ms. Lee said that the Department is doing a better job with the life safety response time and said that the Department is trying to redefine life safety to not include abandoned buildings, which skew the response time.  Ms. Lee said that the inspection turnaround time for building, plumbing and electrical is 97% and said that the Department is trying to reach the goal of 98%.

c. Financial Report. - continued

Acting Director Lee asked if the financial report could be continued until the next meeting.  President Walker said that the report would be included in the December 18, 2006 meeting

d. Update on the progress of the Statement of Incompatible Activities with the Ethics Commission.

Acting Director Lee said that there was delay with this issue because of staff turnaround at the Department of Human Resources (DHR) and said that a new staff person had been reassigned.  Ms. Lee said that the Department was trying to work out the differences to see if there is something that the Department could accept as well as the unions.  President Walker asked if there was any timeframe for when the SIA had to be official.  Ms. Lee said that there was no specific deadline, but DBI is one of the top tier departments.  President Walker said that the Department had asked for someone from the Ethics Commission to come on board to educate DBI staff and said that this would be happening soon. 

There was no public comment on the Director’s report.

 4.

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

Ms. Crystal Lei said that it has been four years in a row that the City of San Francisco has prevented her from spending Christmas in her own home.  Ms. Lei said that she and her son have been sleeping on the floor of a friend’s basement for four years.  Ms. Lee stated that she was present to ask the Commissioners to assist her in obtaining justice from the Commission and from DBI.  Ms. Lei passed out a memorandum to the Commissioners and said that this memorandum would explain everything that happened with her project.  Ms. Lei said that she had been treated differently than other customers and asked the Commissioners to visit her property.

Mr. Tony Fu showed a letter from the Mayor of Redwood City stating that Mr. Fu is an honest, hardworking man.  Mr. Fu stated that he has tried to follow that creed, but said that he could no longer stay silent about Ms. Lei’s project.  Mr. Fu said that the City Attorney was allowing Ms. Lei’s home to be searched without just cause and without a warrant and stated that the City Attorney has produced perjured declarations.  Mr. Fu said that DBI had alleged that Ms. Lei had done a rear extension of 20 by 25 feet and a penthouse on the top floor.  Mr. Fu stated that this was not the case and was not true.

President Walker said that she believed that this project was actually being reviewed by several other agencies and was now out of DBI’s jurisdiction.  Acting Director Lee said that currently DBI was working with the City Attorney as well as with outside Federal authorities.  Commissioner Hirsch asked if staff could give a brief description of what this is about.  Ms. Lee said that this was not an agendized item and said she would rather not discuss it.  Ms. Lee called on Acting Deputy Director Carla Johnson to speak briefly on the issue.

Acting Deputy Director Carla Johnson said that there is a long history on this case and said that there was litigation that was filed by the property owner against the City, as well as litigation that was filed by the City against the property owner.  Ms. Johnson stated that this litigation ended up going before a judge for arbitration and said that the issue is all about the nature of the permits and the necessary plans that need to be submitted to clear outstanding Code violations.  Ms. Johnson said that the plans are currently on hold with the Planning Department and would be going through the Section 311 neighborhood notification process.  Ms. Johnson said that she believed that the permit holder was hoping to avoid that notification process.  Ms. Johnson stated that this matter is in the hands of the Planning Department and said that the judge ruled on that specific issue.

President Walker suggested that the Ms. Lei and Mr. Fu attend the Joint meeting to be held with the Planning Commission on Thursday evening to speak at public comment. 

Acting Deputy Director Carla Johnson said that this property was finished on the exterior, but said that the interior is actually exposed and that was part of the delay in the whole process.  Ms. Johnson said that DBI staff was trying to get the property owner to remove sheet rock to determine if the building was substantially reframed as part of the alteration project.

There was no further public comment.

5.

Update on DBI’s search for a permanent Director. [President Debra Walker]
   

President Walker said that she was happy to report that the search firm, Bob Murray & Associates, had received around 45 applications for the position of Director of DBI and had gone through the process of evaluating all of those applications.  President Walker stated that she had asked a couple of City officials, Controller Ed Harrington, City Administrator Ed Lee and the Director of the Department of Public Works for advice on these applications and the process.  President Walker said that Regan Williams of Bob Murray & Associates is in the process of ranking the candidates and will be coming before the Commission to make recommendations.  President Walker said that the interviews would probably happen in January. President Walker said that she had requested information from the City Attorney about specific legal requirements and boundaries for the interview process so that the Commission will be in compliance with Sunshine laws and public notice requirements.  President Walker stated that she thought that the Commission would interview in Closed Session and would try to do it in one day.

Commissioner Hirsch asked if all of the Commissioners would see all of the 45 applications.  President Walker said that the Commissioners would see all of the applications, except for those applicants that requested confidentiality at the level of the search firm unless that applicant is included in the top level of consideration.  Commissioner Hirsch said that he understood that some applicants had not made the final cut because of some technicalities.  President Walker said that it would probably be because the applicant did not meet the minimum requirements.  Commissioner Hirsch asked if the Commission could still choose to interview any of those applicants.  President Walker said that there are minimum requirements and if people do not meet the minimum requirement then that applicant would not be interviewed.  Commissioner Theriault said that he would still like to see the entire list and see what the basis for exclusion was.  President Walker stated that the Commissioners would see why people were put in one category or another as the interviews are set up.  Commissioner Murphy said that he thought it was important that when the Commission gets down to a final candidate that the vote for a new Director be unanimous.


President Walker said that she hoped to have an assessment of the procedures from the City Attorney by the next meeting.  Commissioner Murphy asked who would know all of the negotiating going on besides the search company as it is hard to keep a secret around DBI.  Commissioner Murphy said that there were rumors going around the Department right now.  Acting Director Lee said that she heard that she was fired the previous week.  President Walker said that there were a lot of rumors, none of which were true, as nothing at all has happened except that applications have been received and phone calls have been made.  President Walker stated that Mr. Williams was doing the initial interviews.  Commissioner Murphy said that one complaint was that someone within the Department who is supposedly very qualified for the job was already dismissed.  President Walker said that if people are not being interviewed, it would be because they do not meet the minimum qualifications and said that there is a requirement for a degree of some sort and then there is a preference for people who have experience running major departments.  Commissioner Theriault said that he thought it critical that all of the Commissioners see all of the applications and the basis for the search firm’s judgment on them. 


President Walker said that the Commission hired a search firm so that the search firm would make recommendations of who the Commission would interview.  Commissioner Hirsch said that he thought it was Ed Lee and Ed Harrington who were involved in the determination.  President Walker said that it was the search firm, but the City people offered more background information when the search firm did not have enough information.  Vice-President Lee asked that Mr. Regan Williams from the search firm be present prior to the interviews to speak with the Commission.

Commissioner Hirsch asked if the Commission had the legal right to waive requirements.  President Walker said that those requirements were set by the Department of Human Resources, but asked the City Attorney to check if it was possible to waive any requirements.  Commissioner Murphy asked if it was still a number one priority that the new Director be someone from the outside.  President Walker said that the process that Regan Williams went through was to talk with each of the Commissioners along with key staff at DBI to get criteria from them regarding the hiring of the new Director.  President Walker said that she thought that everyone expressed a desire to get someone from the outside.

President Walker said that January would be a very busy month for the Commission and said that it was possible that there would be a new, permanent Director at DBI by February.


Mr. Henry Karnilowitz said that he was very please that there was going to be a permanent Director and said that he thought that Acting Director Amy Lee had done an excellent job.  Mr. Karnilowitz stated that he thought it was important for the morale of the Department to get someone as soon as possible and to get someone from the outside to clear the air at DBI.


Acting Director Lee said that she wanted to make it clear that it was never her goal to be the Director at DBI and said that she did not apply for the position.  Ms. Lee said that she loved working with DBI staff, but said that she would be glad to assist the Department as it transitions into new leadership.  Ms. Lee said that it is troubling to now hear rumors that she is getting fired and said that she wanted to make sure that it was clear that she did not seek to be the permanent Director, but said it is her own personal ego that needs to get to another position.


President Walker thanked Ms. Lee for taking on the task of being interim Director of the Department while the Commission was going through the hiring process.  President Walker thanked Ms. Lee for offering to stay on through the transition and said that this should be made as easy as possible for staff.
 6. Discussion and possible action to adopt a policy regarding Commissioner attendance at BIC meetings. [President Debra Walker]

President Walker said that the Commission had received a directive from the Mayor’s Office regarding Commissioner’s attendance at meetings.  President Walker stated that attendance at BIC meetings had not been a problem.  President Walker read some of the items on the directive from the Mayor’s Office regarding attendance:  All Commissioner’s absences are to be excused in which a Commission Secretary or appropriate representative is notified in advance of the meeting about the absence; A working goal of 100% attendance of Commissioners which shows the critical importance of attendance as a practical matter; Each Commission should have at least 90% of attendance to the regular commission meetings; In order to monitor efforts towards these goals the Mayor is asking that Commission Secretaries submit an annual report to the Mayor’s Office detailing Commissioner attendance each year and asks Commission Secretaries to contact the Commission Liaison if a Commissioner misses a meeting without contacting the Department in advance or has missed three meetings in a fiscal year so that the Mayor’s Office can contact the Commissioner and discuss the issue. 


President Walker said that this directive was sent to every Commission in the City. 


Commissioner Hirsch made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Theriault that the template sent by the Mayor be adopted for the Building Inspection Commissioners.  The motion carried unanimously.


RESOLUTION NO. BIC 055-06

 

 7.

 Status of a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) between DBI and the San Francisco Housing Authority concerning DBI’s Building Code enforcement activities in Housing Authority projects.  [Chief Housing Inspector Rosemary Bosque]

 

Acting Director Lee said that this was an item that was brought to the Commission previously in draft.  Chief Housing Inspector Rosemary Bosque said that she wanted to emphasize that the Department’s ultimate goal is to make sure that the residents of the Housing Authority live in a house with safe conditions.  Ms. Bosque stated that DBI has powerful tools such as litigation so the Department wants to be of assistance to the Housing Authority, given their limitations on making sure that maintenance issues get addressed for the residents.  Ms. Bosque said that this MOU is one step in that direction to make DBI as well as the Housing Authority more accountable to these residents. 

Ms. Bosque said that a document was transmitted to the Housing Authority last week and DBI did get confirmation by phone that the Housing Authority’s General Counsel’s Office was reviewing it.  Ms. Bosque said that she was sure that there will be some suggestions or revisions, but said that the process was moving forward and said that staff would keep the Commission informed.  President Walker asked if there was a timeline on this issue.  Ms. Bosque said that she would give the Housing Authority until the end of the week to review the document and then call to follow up. 

Commissioner Murphy asked how many units were involved City-wide.  Ms. Bosque said that there are at least 5,000 units so this would have a significant impact on the Department.  Ms. Bosque stated that the MOU is pretty much a complaint-driven system.  Commissioner Murphy asked if there would be special Inspectors assigned to these complaints.  Ms. Bosque said that she thought that the Department would have to have special Inspectors to accommodate the very tight time frames of the MOU and to work closely with the Housing Authority on these matters.
    

Vice-President Lee asked if Ms. Bosque could come back in a couple of months and give the Commission a status of what type of complaints came in and how they were resolved.  Ms. Bosque said that she could include that information in the monthly statistics or on a quarterly basis.

 
 8.  

Discussion and possible action to adopt Ordinance amending the San Francisco Building Code by adding Section 102.21 to require official placards to be used to warn of unsafe building occupancies following disasters; and adopt findings (File No. 061211). Sponsored by the Board of Supervisors.  [Emergency Program Coordinator Vernon Takasuka]

Mr. Vernon Takasuka said that the mission of the Department of Building Inspection after a major event such as the Loma Prieta earthquake is to get people back into their buildings as soon as possible and said that a final component of that process is the placement of official placards on buildings after an assessment has been made.  Mr. Takasuka said that the placards clearly identify conditions of buildings to owners and occupants and said that the goal is to propose a formal adoption of these placards to the Commission.  Mr. Takasuka stated that in the past the placards had only been a recommendation and this adoption would make them official and enforceable.  Mr. Takasuka reported that the California Buildings Officials (CALBO) and the Office of Emergency Services were encouraging all cities to have a uniform placarding system in place throughout the State.  Mr. Takasuka said that there is a pool of about 4,000 disaster workers throughout the State that are called upon after a major or regional event and it is important that all of these workers be trained with consistence and uniformity regarding these placards. Mr. Takasuka explained the uses of the yellow, green and red placards.


Mr. Takasuka showed changes in the placards used currently by the City and the new placards recommended and said that the new placards would establish clear guidelines for individuals to enter or not enter damaged buildings.  Mr. Takasuka stated that in the past when buildings were “red” tagged people thought that the buildings would have to be demolished, but most times that was not the case. 


Acting Director Lee said that this was something that is very important to the City’s emergency preparedness and response and said that this legislation was just a technicality to make San Francisco consistent with the State standards and other jurisdictions. 


President Walker said that she attended one of the trainings and said that this was a very important program.  President Walker stated that it was important to make everything consistent so that people coming from Fremont or Sacramento to help in the event of a catastrophe would know what they are looking at and would not have to be retrained on a different set of tags.


Mr. Ray Lui said that he wanted to add a couple of words to Mr. Takasuka’s presentation and to speak on the Code Advisory Committee’s (CAC) recommendations..  Mr. Lui said that the CAC wanted to include language that would use these and other standardized placards, basically, allowing room for an orange or blue tag, something that is not the red, yellow or green.  Mr. Lui stated that speaking as an Emergency Management Manager, as well as from the Office of Emergency Services’ (OES) Safety Assessment Program Steering Committee, he believed that it would be a mistake to do that.  Mr. Lui said that the goal is to have standardized placards that would be used by mutual aid workers from other parts of the State and said that to allow other placards would add confusion. 


Mr. Lui said that the second recommendation from the CAC made was to include language stating that a fine would be imposed should someone remove these tag, but said that currently on the bottom the tag it says that the tags cannot be removed unless authorized by the appropriate agency.  Mr. Lui said that this is something that the Commission might consider adding.


Mr. Lui stated that the last thing that the CAC commented on is that the Department has police powers to tag these buildings and Mr. Lui said that he did not believe that to be true as in the past the State OES’s evaluation of the placarding is that they are not truly enforceable because there was no legislation behind it.  Acting Director Lee said that this was one of the reasons to adopt this legislation. Commissioner Grubb asked who would do the formal adoption.  Mr. Lui said that it would be the Board of Supervisors.


Deputy City Attorney John Malamut said that regarding penalties there are penalties set forth in the Building Code and said that he thought that the CAC was recommending that the placards themselves include an additional statement that publicly announces that on the placard itself. 


President Walker said that she would support the point about penalties recommended by the CAC, but would not support having additional placards as she thought that it was important to have consistency. President Walker asked for clarification of the third recommendation.  Mr. Lui said that he thought the CAC felt that DBI already had police powers to enforce these placards and are going along with the recommendations of CALBO and OES for the formal legislation.  Acting Director Lee said that she thought that the CAC was just noting that DBI is doing this legislation process. 


Commissioner Theriault made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Grubb that the Commission support the legislation, but add the recommendation of the CAC, that the placards include language that says that anyone removing a placard would be fined.


Mr. Alan Tokugawa, Secretary to the Code Advisory Committee, said that he wanted to state that the CAC knows that there are penalties already in place, but wanted to emphasize them by placing the language on the placards.  Mr. Tokugawa said that the intent of having an orange placard would be to help workers monitor a building if in fact a building had been taken care of.  Acting Director Lee said that she appreciated the CAC’s comments, but said that she thought it was important to be consistent and to leave the legislation at the yellow, green or red placards. 


Mr. Henry Karnilowitz said that he thought it was important to add the language in this legislation that there would be a penalty if someone removes these placards.  Mr. Karnilowitz said that in 1989 after the Loma Prieta earthquake people were removing the tags so this would put some teeth into the legislation. 


President Walker called for a vote on the motion.


The motion carried unanimously.


RESOLUTION NO. BIC 056-06
 9. Discussion and possible action to adopt Ordinance amending the San Francisco Building Code by adding Sections 106.4.1.3, 105.6.2, 106.3.2 and 1701.5 to create a  Crestmont Hill Slope Protection Area, specify the composition of the Structural Advisory Committee for permit applications located within that area, require that the  applicant provide substantial documentation that there exists sufficient infrastructure        to support the proposed residential development and that the proposed emergency access routes meet standards in effect at the time of the application and to require special inspections throughout the construction process for sites located within the Crestmont Hill Slope Protection Area.  (File No. 061109).  Sponsored by Supervisor Elsbernd. [Principal Engineer/Assistant Manager of Permit Services Hanson Tom]

President Walker introduced Supervisor Sean Elsbernd and thanked him for coming to present this item.  Supervisor Elsbernd said that normally he would not get involved in such a project and would let the developer deal with the Planning Code, the Planning process and the environmental process, but said that from listening to neighbors in this area a lot of their concerns revolve around questions of seismic and structural safety.  Supervisor Elsbernd said that this situation reminded him of the discussion he had with residents and neighbors in the area of the mountains in the West Portal Area.  Supervisor Elsbernd stated that at that time the then Board of Supervisors passed legislation in the Building Code with respect to projects in the Edgehill Mountains and said that he basically copied that legislation for Mount Sutro.  Supervisor Elsbernd thanked the Department for their technical savvy and sophistication in drafting this legislation. Supervisor Elsbernd said that the project sponsor was present to speak along with many of the concerned neighbors.  Supervisor Elsbernd said that he would be available to answer any questions. 

Mr. Hanson Tom, Principal Engineer for the Department of Building Inspection, said that Supervisor Elsbernd had given a thorough explanation of the situation and said that there were a lot of similarities in this area to the Edgehill Mountain area.  Mr. Tom said that in examining the area with the Code Advisory Committee it was suggested that it would be prudent to create a Structural Advisory Committee review for any new construction or any alterations that involve substantial change in the Mount Sutro area. Mr. Tom stated that the Structural Advisory Committee would consist of a Structural Engineer, a Geologist, a Geotechnical Engineer and Architects.  Mr. Tom said that the Department was supporting this legislation. Commissioner Murphy asked if this special Advisory Committee would be triggered for all new construction such as small decks.  Mr. Tom said that it would be only large construction projects that would trigger a review. 

Commissioner Hirsch asked why a Code amendment would be required and why the Department would not handle this like any other project.  Commissioner Hirsch said that he was concerned that every parcel in the City could be subject to a Code amendment for each specific project. 


Acting Director Lee said that because there were unavoidable delays in getting this legislation implemented, she issued policy that the Department would require a Structural Advisory Committee on these types of projects several weeks ago. 


Commissioners Murphy said that he was not against this legislation, but was concerned about amending the Building Code for specific projects.  President Walker said that she did not think that this was for a specific project.  Supervisor Elsbernd said that Commissioner Murphy raised a standard objection, but said that he did not think that this legislation would open the door for every neighborhood to seek such legislation because this is a very unique neighborhood located on the side of a steep slope.  Supervisor Elsbernd stated that he agreed that projects do not merit amendments to the Building Code, but said that this is a very unique, specific circumstance that warrants significantly more protection than is currently available.  Supervisor Elsbernd said that he is a public guardian as are all of the Commissioners and said that this would provide a safety net to those neighbors who are not terribly comfortable with the process and have seen other projects that have not worked out well.  Supervisors Elsbernd said that this legislation would give those neighbors a sense of comfort as they work through the Building and Planning processes and said that this, in itself, would warrant the passage of the ordinance. 


President Walker asked Supervisor Elsbernd to compare this legislation to the legislation in existence for the Edgehill area. Supervisor Elsbernd explained that there have been occurrences of landslides in both areas and both have very narrow passageways for fire equipment, which is dangerous because of heavy vegetation.  President Walker asked if the presence of the Edgehill designation helped around development in that area.   Supervisor Elsbernd said that about six or eight months ago he was approached by someone who had just bought a vacant lot on Kensington Way which is in the Edgehill area.  Supervisor Elsbernd stated that this developer was well aware of the protections in this area and knew that before anything could even be talked about that the developer had to go through these extra steps.  Supervisor Elsbernd said that he thought it was important for developers to know that there is a heightened level of scrutiny that they are going to have to go through up front.  Supervisor Elsbernd said that he saw a genuine commitment to seismic and structural safety and said he thought it was because of the Edgehill legislation. 


Commissioner Hirsch said that he could see others in San Francisco wanting such legislation in their neighborhoods and said that he could see extending this in other parts of the City.  Commissioner Hirsch said that he was not against the protection that this legislation affords, but said he was concerned about the mechanism by which it is being implemented, as he was not comfortable with amending the Building Code for each specific area in the City.  President Walker said that this would not be for each area in the City, just for ones that are landslide risks.


President Walker called for public comment and limited the public comment to two minutes for each speaker due to the number of speakers.


Hanson Tom said that he wanted to clarify that the name of the legislation had been changed to the Northwest Sutro Mountain Protection Area instead of Crestmont Hill by the Code Advisory Committee. 


Mr. Alan Tokugawa, Secretary to the Code Advisory Committee said that the CAC were concerned about the boundaries that were set forth in this legislation and would like to request that there be further study as to those boundaries.


Mr. Ned Fennie of the CAC said that he was concerned that some of the areas that have had landslides are not included in the boundaries.  Mr. Fennie said that Mr. Frank Rollo expressed his concern that the boundary is not large enough.  Mr. Fennie stated that some of the properties that are within the boundaries are not at risk and should not be burdened by additional bureaucratic red tape.  Mr. Fennie said that the CAC was advising that a study be done to determine the boundaries to accurately assess the risks. 


President Walker asked Supervisor Elsbernd to explain how the boundaries were drawn.


Supervisor Elsbernd said that there was not a lot of technical analysis done in drawing the boundaries; it was a fairly informal discussion with some of the neighbors.  Supervisor Elsbernd said that he would be happy to take any technical suggestions from the CAC.  President Walker asked if there was a time issue around the Commission adopting this legislation today.  Supervisor Elsbernd said that he would appreciate if some sort of legislation could done today and suggested that the legislation be passed with an amendment that would include language that if there is any project outside of the current map that the Director would have the ability to issue certain guidelines and mandate in the legislation that a technical study be done and brought back to the BIC in two to three months.  Mr. Fennie of the CAC said that this would be acceptable. Mr. Fennie presented a map showing the boundaries.


President Walker called for public comment.


Mr. Paul Gorman introduced himself as the Chairman of the Mount Sutro Woods Owner’s Association.  Mr. Gorman spoke in favor of the legislation and said that he was concerned about the size of the development that is being projected.  Mr. Gorman said that he was concerned about the vibrations from drilling on buildings up above which were built to 50-year old building standards and which could not be built today.


Dr. Samuel Sobel of 435 Crestmont said that he supported this ordinance because this construction would destroy this neighborhood.  Dr. Sobel stated that there have been landslides in the area and said that residents below the proposed project would be in danger from earth movement up above.  Dr. Sobel said that the houses in this area are on pylons and called attention to the narrowness of the street and the lack of access for public safety.


Mr. Herbert William Dunmire of 345 Warren Drive spoke in favor of the ordinance and said that at one time the City had to build a major retaining wall because of the scooping out of building sites that failed.  Mr. Dunmire said that as a homeowner he received a notice from City Hall to attend a meeting to find out how much of a special assessment he was going to be charged so the City could recoup funds spent to construct the retaining wall.  Mr. Dunmire stated that he thought this legislation would save the City a ton of money.


Mr. William Seifert of 475 Crestmont spoke in favor of the ordinance and said that a sewer line was broken by equipment doing geologic studies and drilling and said that he could not imagine what heavy equipment would do to this area. 


Ms. Jackie Palavin of Oakmont Drive said that she lived at the far end of the undeveloped portion of this hillside that wraps around this project.  Ms. Palavin said that if someone was calling for emergency services in this area the emergency services people would have to wait for somebody to back up out of the way to be able to get to many of these homes.  Ms. Palavin said that this development would be adding an additional 100 cars and said that there is no public transportation in the area.  Ms. Palavin stated that this neighborhood is not like any other in San Francisco and said that she was concerned about safety.


Mr. David Palavin said that he also lives at Oakmont Drive and stated that he was concerned about emergency services reaching many of the properties in this area.  Mr. Palavin invited the Commissioners to visit the area to see the conditions for themselves.


Ms. Lucy Power of 505-507 Crestmont Drive said that she was in favor of the ordinance and said that she could attest to the fact that the neighborhood does not have sufficient space to allow emergency vehicles to come in or out and said that she was concerned that this project would add an additional 500 feet of roadway and another 100 cars. 


Mr. Charles Powell of 353 Crestmont Drive said that he agreed with everything that had been stated in support of this legislation.  Mr. Powell expressed concern about landslides in the area and said that there was one house in the area that is in danger of going down which is right above the proposed project.


Ms. Helen Sobel said that she lived on Crestmont Drive right above the proposed development.  Ms. Sobel said that she was also speaking for Dr. Edmund Egger who was unable to attend the meeting, but sent her an e-mail communicating his concerns about the stability of the hill behind his house.  Ms. Sobel said that this ordinance should definitely be adopted.


Ms. Jennifer Con of 233 Crestmont said that she did not live directly above the proposed project, but on a street that goes down to a dead end.  Ms. Con stated that 90% of her house is cantilevered over the hillside on four pylons.  Ms. Con said that there was water activity in this area because years ago homes were built over an underground stream and said that one home was removed because it just slid off of its foundation.  Ms. Con said that the underground stream is still there and said that not only are homes in this area in danger, but there is a huge apartment complex at the base of the hill that would be damaged if anything were to slide or fall.


Mr. Steve Vettle said that he was speaking on behalf of Crestmont Hills LLC, which is the developer that the neighbors had been talking about.  Mr. Vettle put a map on the screen showing the development site which he said is a privately owned vacant lot, zoned for 61 Units.  Mr. Vettle said that Crestmont Drive is above the project and said that many of the speakers are from Crestmont Drive.  Mr. Vettle showed a slide of what the project would look like.  Mr. Vettle said that the project would be 17 duplexes, low density and similar to the density of the property above it.  Mr. Vettle stated that the developer would welcome the extreme scrutiny of the geological and structural issues and have no fundamental objection to this legislation.  Mr. Vettle said that there was a Peer Review Committee in place that had met and looked at the preliminary geotechnical report and made recommendations.  Mr. Vettle stated that those recommendations were taken into account for the final geotechnical report that was issued in September and said that there is a draft EIR that is underway that incorporates that geotechnical report.  Mr. Vettle said that the report looks at emergency access issues and parking and said that the developer was proposing at least 51 parking spaces for the 31 units.  Mr. Vettle said that the developer was comfortable with this legislation moving forward with the technical amendments that are recommended by the Structural Advisory Committee.   Mr. Vettle said that the developer would have no objection to a further study of the boundaries of this legislation.


Mr. Henry Karnilowitz said that he believed that this project, if built, could actually stabilize the hillside by having the piers go down to bedrock.  Mr. Karnilowitz stated that he thought the Commission should go along with the CAC recommendations to extend the boundaries, but said that he hoped that everybody who has houses in this area realized that this legislation would impact all of their properties.  Mr. Karnilowitz said that his would impact anyone who might want to add a second story or do a horizontal addition.


Mr. Alfonso Fostino of 335 Crestmont said that his house was out of the boundary area, but on the same block as the proposed project.  Mr. Fostino said that he wanted to support the ordinance, but also wanted to voice his opinion about the proposed development in the area because he thought that it is unsafe.  Mr. Fostino said that there was a house that slid on Warren Drive that caused a problem on that street, but also caused problems on Laguna Honda Boulevard, 7th Avenue and Lawton Streets.  Mr. Fostino stated that where the house slid is still a vacant lot and said that a developer mentioned that the reason it was not being built on was because the safety issues out weigh the land developer’s profit margin.  Mr. Fostino said that he believed that more development in this area would weaken all of the foundations in the surrounding area.  Mr. Fostino said that several homes in the area have already had to go through foundation rework.


Commissioner Theriault said that he would move to approve the ordinance with an amendment that states that the boundaries will be redrawn according to the recommendations of a geological study which is to be completed in three months.  Mr. Hanson Tom said that he was concerned as to who would be funding this study and said that he would estimate the cost to be about $30,000.  Supervisor Elsbernd said he did not know who would fund the study, but said that he would find $30,000 in the budget somewhere to make sure this was funded.  Commissioner Grubb seconded the motion. 

 

President Walker stated that the motion would be to adopt the legislation and recommend to the Board of Supervisors that a survey be completed within three months to establish specific boundaries and this would come back through DBI and the Code Advisory Committee for the mapping to be approved; the legislation would then come back to the BIC for final approval of the map.  

Commissioner Hirsch said that he wanted to make his concern clear with this legislation as he thought that there were two things going on with this discussion.  Commissioner Hirsch said that it was good public policy to make sure that a certain geologic, geographic area of the City goes under scrutiny for property development.  Commissioner Hirsch said that there is another issue that is unstated and that this is directed to a specific project that is being contemplated.  Commissioner Hirsch stated that it seemed from the testimony heard that people who are against this unnamed project are in favor of this ordinance in the hopes that the geologic and geotechnical and hazardous study that will result, will kill the project.  Commissioner Hirsch said that he would vote for this ordinance with great misgivings, in the sense that he did not think it good public policy to legislate this sort of thing.  Commissioner Hirsch said that he felt that if the Building Code is not strong enough, generically, for the City and County of San Francisco and requires special amendments on a district by district situation, then perhaps the whole Building Code needs review, not just a specific amendment like this. 


Commissioner Theriault said that he understood Commissioner Hirsch ‘s reservations, but said that it seemed appropriate that if standing requirement for a geologist does help address legitimate concerns of the neighborhoods, where there are legitimate concerns, then he thought it was worthwhile to do this.  Commissioner Grubb said that he would agree and said that he thought this would provide some comfort level for the community.  Vice-President Lee said that he thought it was very smart of the residents to recognize that construction of any size could possibly disrupt the land in the hill. 
 

President Walker asked for a vote on the motion.  The motion carried unanimously.


RESOLUTION NO. BIC 057-06


President Walker said that the Commission would see this legislation back within the three month time frame. 
Supervisor Elsbernd thanked the Commission for their cooperation.

 
 10. Status of Seismic Initiatives including Community Action Plan for Seismic Safety (CAPSS).  [Manager Raymond Lui, Structural Safety & Emergency Management Division & Chief Building Inspector/Manager of Technical Services Laurence Kornfield]

Manager Ray Lui reported that on November 15th and 16th the Department participated in Golden Guardian that was a regional wide exercise conducted at the State level by activating the regional emergency operations center and the local emergency operations center at 1011 Turk Street for response to a 7.9 earthquake on the San Andreas Fault.  Mr. Lui said that the Fire Departments from several local jurisdictions participated in urban search and rescue task forces.  Mr. Lui stated that DBI did quite a few things well and definitely learned about a few things that need improvement in case of an emergency. 


Mr. Lui said that his division is involved in earthquake hazard reduction programs and mentioned that the UMB program has been largely successful.  Mr. Lui stated that there are a few delinquent buildings that are still on the UMB list that are now at the City Attorney’s Office and said that he would like to continue the UMB program for a short time.


Mr. Lui reported that this division is working on or planning to work on in the future the following activities:


Expanding the Building Occupancy Resumption Program (BORP) by certifying Inspectors or Engineers for the purpose of tagging damaged buildings after an earthquake.

Doing a field inventory to evaluate buildings in order to create a City-wide database. This should be completed sometime in April.


Working on AB83 regarding the Tall Buildings Administrative Bulletin which is currently under review by the Advisory Committee and Structural Committee.

Speaking with other jurisdictions to assess what they are doing with the auto shut off valve.  There will be a second public meeting on January 24th.


President Walker asked if the Building Code requirements regarding housing construction are to a level of health safety and not a level of building protection.  Mr. Lui said that the intent of the Code is definitely to design buildings, not just houses, but buildings in general, to not fall down in the case of a large magnitude earthquake and to protect life safety.  Mr. Lui said that this provides something a little better than what is the minimum requirement, but said that this did not mean that no buildings would fall down.  President Walker said that in the joint meeting with the Planning Commission this item was discussed and asked Mr. Lui to think about this as a future agenda item when the next joint meeting is held.  Mr. Lui called on Laurence Kornfield to report on the CAPSS program.


Mr. Kornfield said that the CAPSS program is moving along slowly, but moving and said that the Department issued a Request for Proposals (RFP) and received a single response from the Applied Technology Council (ATC).  Mr. Kornfield stated that he had included in the Commissioners packet a memo regarding who might be appropriate representatives from various organizations to serve on the Project Advisory Board. President Walker asked if these were the same representatives that served previously.  Mr. Kornfield said that some were the same and said that the Board should be able to meet at the beginning of February. 


Mr. Henry Karnilowitz said that he thought that the issue of soft story buildings to be retrofitted should be worked on immediately to get legislation passed as soon as possible.  Mr. Karnilowitz stated that if an earthquake were to happen many of these buildings would collapse and people might get hurt.


President Walker said that she had been talking to the person in charge of the Mayor’s Office of Housing regarding the UMB fund that was designated to help building owners get funding for the seismic upgrading of unreinforced masonry buildings.  President Walker said that there is discussion about what actions are needed to transfer the UMB funds to the Soft Story Program.  Acting Director Lee said that this action would require a ballot measure and said that the Mayor and other City agencies are very supportive of making those funds available for people with soft story buildings. Ms. Lee said that the Department was trying to tap into Federal money for data collection through the Office of Emergency Services.
 11. Review and approval of the minutes of the November 6, 2006 meeting.


Commissioner Romero made a motion, seconded by Commission Grubb that the minutes by approved.  Vice-President Lee said that he had one correction to page 9, the second to last paragraph where the word meeting was left out.  The motion carried with the correction to be made.  Commissioner Hirsch did not vote as he was not present at the November 6th meeting.


RESOLUTION NO. BIC 058-06

 
 12. Commissioner’s Questions and Matters.

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


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

Commissioner Murphy asked for an update on the 1650 Mission Street move.  President Walker said that this item would be on the agenda of the next meeting. 


President Walker reminded everyone of the Joint Meeting of the Building Inspection Commission and the Planning Commission to take place on Thursday, December 7, 2006 at 6:00 p.m. in the Board of Supervisors’ Chambers, Room 250.


President Walker said that she would like an update on the Controller’s audit at the next regular meeting.  President Walker stated that she would update the Commissioners about the Director Search and said that she should have a directive from the City Attorney about what needs to be done to comply with all the Sunshine Ordinance and Brown Act rules.


Secretary Aherne said that there would be an Abatement Appeals Board meeting before the next BIC meeting. 


President Walker said that she was working on having a list of the seats that are appointable for the BIC Sub-Committees and would like that included as a future agenda item. 


Secretary Aherne stated that the meeting dates for January would be January 8th and January 22nd due to holidays falling on the regular meeting dates.  President Walker said that additional meetings might be needed for the interview process regarding the Director’s position.

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

 

There was no public comment.

 
 14 Adjournment.

 

Commissioner Murphy made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Theriault that the meeting be adjourned.  The motion carried unanimously.

 

RESOLUTION NO. BIC 059-06

 

 

 

Respectfully Submitted,


______________________

Ann Marie Aherne
Commission Secretary



SUMMARY OF REQUESTS BY COMMISSIONERS

List of potential members of the Public Advisory Committee for the CAPSS program from Acting Director Lee. – Commissioner Theriault

Page 5

Update on UMB funds being switched for use on other seismic issues. – President Walker

Page 6

Update on process for interviewing potential candidates for the position of permanent Director. – President Walker

Pages 8-9

Update on Memorandum of Understanding between DBI and the San Francisco Housing Authority. – President Walker

Page 9