MEMBERS OF THE BOARD

DEPARTMENT REPRESENTATIVES

Ms. Betty Louie, Chairperson

Gary Ho, Structural Engineer

(415) 558-6083

Ms. Lucia Bogatay, Vice Chairperson

Serena J. Fung, Recording Secretary 

(415) 558-6196

Mr. Patrick Buscovich

Mr. Chad Thompson.

CITY ATTORNEY’S OFFICE REPRESENTATIVE

Mr. Howard L. Zee

Judith Boyajian Deputy City Attorney 

(415) 554-4636)

Mr. Frank Rollo, Sr.

Mr. Tony Thompson

CALL TO ORDER

The meeting was called to order by Chairperson, Betty Louie, at 1:05 P.M.

ROLL CALL

The roll call showed a Quorum present.

The Chairperson welcomed and introduced Patrick Buscovich to his newly appointed seat on the Board.  Member Buscovich fills the Structural Engineer slot on the Board, replacing Faye Bernstein who resigned in August.  Currently there are 7 Board members and 2 vacancies.

APPELANTS

Appeal No.:  05-001

Building Permit Application No.:  2005/05/17/2661

Building Address:  235 O’Farrell Street

Owner:  H. Drake Corporation

Project Architect:  Alexander J. H. Sivyer, Holmes Culley

Representatives Present:  Alexander Sivyer, PE; Bill Tremayne; and Matthew Weil

Mr. Sivyer presented the Appeal to the Board.  The Appellant is seeking acceptance of criteria by which the seismic reinforcement of the building can integrate the use of fibre-reinforced wrap as a prescribed method.  Currently, the SFBC does not allow use of this method.

Mr. Sivyer gave a brief history of the building, noting that it is a Designated Landmark and therefore, subject to further restrictions.

The permit appeal before the Board concerns only the portions from the 2nd floor up through the roof.  Work for the 2nd floor down and through the basement levels were approved by the Department of Building Inspection.

There are several reasons for the use of the fibre-reinforced wrap method.  The process is less disruptive and allows for maximum use of limited interior spaces.  The method is also structurally efficient compared to other reinforced options.

Throughout the industry, there have been published sets of interim criteria which addresses the fibre-reinforced wrap method.

After much technical questioning, the Board decided to hold any action until the 2nd appeal was heard.  The Appellants agreed.

Appeal No.:  05-002

Building Permit Application No.:  2003/08/25/2940

Building Address:  1489-1499 Sutter Street

Owner:  Irene M. Lieberman

Project Architect:  Rajendra Sahai, S. E., Structural Design Engineers

Representatives Present:  Rajendra Sahai, Principal and T. H. Chidley, Consultant

The Appellant in this case also seeks to gain acceptance of criteria by which the seismic reinforcement of the building can integrate the use of fibre-reinforced wrap as a prescribed method.

It was noted that AC125 and AC178 were published documents from the ICC-ES that have been in use and that engineers have been using for criteria in their reinforcement projects.  The City of Los Angeles has adopted and codified the use of the fibre-reinforced wrap as a viable method of seismic retrofit.

It was noted that in both buildings that the use of the wrap was but only a component of the overall projects and was not to be used exclusively for the seismic retrofit buildings.  There are several buildings in San Francisco that have used the fibre-reinforced wrap method, but only one was a brick building.

As previously decided, if 3 cases were brought before the Board and ultimately approved by the DBI, the fibre-reinforced wrap method would be a designated and prescribed method of retrofit.  Future projects using this method would no longer have to come before the Board for approval.

AC125 concerns the interim criteria for concrete and reinforced and unreinforced masonry strengthening using fiber-reinforced polymer (FRP) composite systems.  This document’s latest publication was dated June, 2003.

AC178 concerns the interim criteria for the inspection and verification of concrete and reinforced and unreinforced masonry strengthening using fiber-reinforced polymer (FRP) composite systems.  The latest publication was dated June, 2003.

Again, members of the Board asked several technical questions of the Engineer which were answered.

Member Howard Zee motioned that the Board allow the Appellant for Appeal No. 05-002 to go forward with the permit application process using the criteria outlined in AC125 and AC178 and other documents which would prescribe the use of fibre-reinforced polymer systems in its retrofit.  Member Bogatay seconded the motion.

There being no public comments and no other discussion, the vote was taken.

Vote:

Ayes:   Betty Louie, Lucia Bogatay, Frank Rollo, Sr., Chad Thompson, Howard L. Zee, Patrick Buscovich and Tony Thompson

Abstain:  None

The Board then returned to the first Appeal.  Member Zee echoed the same motion for Appeal No. 05-001.  Member Chad Thompson seconded the motion.  It was noted that Member Rollo recused himself from the discussion and from the vote due to a conflict of interest.

There being no public comments and other discussion, the vote was taken.

Vote:

Ayes:  Betty Louie, Lucia Bogatay, Chad Thompson, Howard L. Zee, Patrick Buscovich and Tony Thompson

Abstain:  None

There being no further public comment and business, the meeting was adjourned at 3:10 P.M.

Respectfully submitted:



___________________
Gary Ho, S.E.
Department of Building Inspection