Building Inspection Commission
BUILDING INSPECTION COMMISSION (BIC)
Department of Building Inspection (DBI)
Wednesday, June 20, 2001 at 1:00 p.m.
City Hall, 1 Dr. Carlton B. Goodlett Place, Room 408
Adopted September 5, 2001
MINUTES
The meeting of the Building Inspection Commission was called to order at 1:15 p.m. by President Fillon.
1. Roll Call - Roll call was taken and a quorum was certified.
COMMISSION MEMBERS PRESENT:
Alfonso Fillon, President Denise D’Anne, Commissioner, excused
Bobbie Sue Hood, Vice-President Esther Marks, Commissioner
Roy Guinnane, Commissioner, excused Rodrigo Santos, Commissioner
Debra Walker, Commissioner, excused
Ann Aherne, Commission Secretary
D.B.I. REPRESENTATIVES:
Frank Chiu, Director
Amy Lee, Assistant Director
Jim Hutchinson, Deputy Director
William Wong, Deputy Director
Tuti Suardana, Secretary
2. President’s Announcements.
President Fillon announced that there was a problem with a quorum for today’s meeting as several of the Commissioners could not be present and one Commissioner agreed to come in for a very short period of time. President Fillon stated that as a result, the Commission would only be hearing Item #10 on the Sprinkler issue. President Fillon said that the Secretary tried to notify as many people as possible that this was going to happen and asked if it were okay with the other Commissioners to continue the rest of the items until the next meeting.
The Commissioners agreed. Commissioner Marks stated that she was happy that the items were continued because she wanted more time to review the audit report.
a. Report and discussion on the Performance Audit of the Department of Building Inspection by the Controller’s Office dated June 11, 2001.
This item was continued until the next meeting.
3. Director’s Report. [Director Chiu]
a. Update on the review and findings of the approved plans for 4733 - 18th Street.
b. Update on 50 Mason Street regarding work started without a permit.
c. Report on the status of Section 102.2 and 102.3 of the San Francisco Building Code as it relates to Tenant Notification and Notice of Director’s Hearing.
These items were continued until the next meeting.
4. 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 at this time.
5. Discussion and possible action regarding DBI keeping the Commission informed about any policy changes in Housing Inspection Services. [Commissioner Marks]
This item was continued until the next meeting.
6. Update on Unlawful Demolition Committee Meeting of June 19, 2001. [Commissioners Hood, Santos & Walker]
This item was continued until the next meeting.
7. Update from site visit to 767 - 769 North Point to investigate drainage issue. [Commissioners Guinnane & Santos]
This item was continued until the next meeting.
8. Discussion and possible action to appoint a committee to work with the City Attorney’s
Office and the Rent Board regarding notification of repair work and permit issuance to tenants of burned out multiple units especially to tenants of residential hotels. [Commissioner Walker]
This item was continued until the next meeting.
9. Report on the status of MIS regarding online permitting and complaint tracking. [MIS Manager Marcus Armstrong]
This item was continued until the next meeting.
10. Discussion and possible action on Supervisor Gavin Newsom’s proposed legislation File
No. 010224 amending the San Francisco Fire Code by adding Section 900.1.3 and the San Francisco Housing Code by amending Section 904, to require the installation of automatic sprinkler systems in residential hotels, as defined in the ordinance. [Director Chiu]
President Fillon stated that this would be the only item that the Commission would be hearing today and called on Director Chiu for his comments.
Director Chiu said that Supervisor Gavin Newsom had sponsored this sprinkler ordinance and Supervisor Chris Daley also signed it in response to the fires over the past several years at SROs and hotels. Director Chiu said that DBI has been working with the Supervisors and the Fire Department for quite some time. Director Chiu said that this particular requirement is similar to what is required in a brand new building, whereas in the existing buildings many of the hotels are not sprinklered. Director Chiu said that this would be triggered in residential hotels when there are three-stories or more, or if the hotel contains 20 units/guest rooms or more. Director Chiu said that this would not be triggered in smaller apartments or hotels and stated that this ordinance would retroactively require that a sprinkler system be provided throughout the building. Director Chiu said that there are a few exceptions such as if there were a problem in some cases where the owner would be able to tap into the existing water line rather than have a new meter and so forth. Director Chiu said that Captain Tom Harvey was present to speak to this issue, but said that he thought this was a good ordinance. Director Chiu said that in the past few years a lot of the older hotels have been destroyed by fire and stated that the Supervisors are trying to respond to these problems. Director Chiu said that he testified in front of the Board of Supervisors’ Committee meeting last week and made the commitment that he would do his best to urge the Commission to help support this ordinance. Director Chiu said that the Board of Supervisors had to continue their meeting because according to the Charter, the BIC has to hear this item first before the Board of Supervisors can take any legal action. Director Chiu said that this item would be on the agenda of Board of Supervisors Committee meeting on Tuesday at 1:00 p.m.
President Fillon asked if because this is retroactive would any building that falls under this category would have to provide sprinklers. President Fillon asked what the timeline would be for enforcement. Director Chiu said that he believed that the timeline was 2002 or 2003. Director Chiu said that this would only apply to residential hotels and not apartment buildings and stated that there was a definition of residential hotels. Captain Harvey said that the date for compliance is June 30, 2002. Commissioner Santos said that obviously this would have a financial impact on the owner of the units and asked if there was any financial incentive attached to this ordinance, such as any low interest loans similar to the funds that were attached to the UMB ordinance. Director Chiu said that, at this point, the Board of Supervisors’ Committee has not worked out the funding issue, but are concerned about the added cost to the existing property owners and there are a number of things that they have been discussing. Director Chiu said that one of the things that has been mentioned by Supervisor Gavin Newsom is to craft some language that the owners could tap into the existing UMB loan program that still has a few million dollars left. Director Chiu said that another idea is tax incentives, but they have not come up with a resolution. Director Chiu said that he still believed, in view of what has happened over the last couple of years, with fires and the displacement of lower income tenants that the City needs to do something to eliminate this kind of displacement.
Vice-President Hood asked if this meant that when there is a two-story building with more than 20 units it would have to be sprinklered and asked if it applied to motels. Vice-President Hood asked how a residential hotel was differentiated from a motel. Director Chiu said that there is a definition in this ordinance about residential hotels and stated that apartment buildings are exempt. Director Chiu said that in answer to Vice-President Hood’s question, if there were a two-story building with 20 or more hotel guest rooms this law would kick in. Vice-President Hood said that she has concerns about some of the exceptions and referred to page 6 at the very top under item C, 2 and quoted "compartments or rooms in the basement of apartment houses containing four or less dwelling units provided that there are no mattresses, upholstered furniture or loose storage contained therein"; Vice-President Hood said that it seemed to her that those rooms are always going to have things stuffed in them and said that any kind of exception based on whether or not furnishings are present is basically unenforceable. Vice-President Hood said that this led her to the question of the origin of this proposal; who put it together and how much did DBI staff participate in it? Director Chiu said that DBI was working with Supervisor Newsom’s Office for about a year and one half and stated that he personally got involved in the last eight or nine months. Director Chiu said that the process stalled for a while because of the funding issue and how the property owner is going to come up with the money; then in the last month or so it has resurfaced again because there have been more fires in SROs which stimulated interest to move on this issue. Vice-President Hood said that she was certainly in favor of moving this ordinance and said she felt it was long overdue, but stated that she wanted to get something that was very clear and enforceable. Vice-President Hood stated that it looks like there is kind of a tendency for, instead of it being concise and clear in application, it looks like it has had a lot of Committee meetings and has gotten a number of exceptions tacked onto it. Vice-President Hood stated that it may not be as powerful as it needs to be, and asked if Captain Tom Harvey could elaborate.
Captain Tom Harvey of the San Francisco Fire Department Code Enforcement said that the section that Commissioner Hood was looking at is existing language in the Housing Code as it is now and it actually does not apply at all to the residential hotel section. Captain Harvey referred to the bottom of page 5 where it shows E - residential hotels, and said that is the only section that is added as far as the hotels that are going to be included on this. Vice-President Hood stated that she was reading from the top of page 5 under C - exceptions, and said that she thought that it did apply to this. Commissioner Marks stated that it was the italicized text that is the new addition. Vice-President Hood said that when these are combined together maybe that needs to be cleaned up as things can be taken out as well as put in. Captain Harvey said that he would agree that maybe it needs to be cleaned up, but said that is something that the Housing Division through Director Chiu needs to work on. Captain Harvey said that this language came from the original retro sprinkler ordinance for hotels around 1986 and that is where, for instance Item D #4 talks about minimum pressures of 15 psi, 22 gpm, at the time the original ordinance was established in 1986 those were probably the technological features of sprinkler systems and such, but now typically it is 7 psi for a sprinkler, so the E portion regarding residential hotels is the more specific portion and everything before it would have no bearing, except for E, because it is specifically geared toward the residential hotels. Captain Harvey said that it is his understanding that there is an actual list of residential hotels that have received a Certificate of Use and this was done sometime between 1975 to 1980 and those are the hotels this is going to apply to; it is not for all buildings and is not retroactive for hotels that have 20 units, but only those residential hotels as defined in the San Francisco Administrative Code. Vice-President Hood thanked Captain Harvey for clearing up this issue.
Captain Harvey said he wanted to add that in the meeting with the Audit, Labor and Government Efficiency Committee that Director Chiu attended, there were a couple of changes that were going to be made; the design criteria for NFPA 13 was going to be changed to 1999 and Supervisor Newsom was talking about changing the compliance date. Captain Harvey stated that it has been a two or three year process to get to this point. Captain Harvey said that he did not know what Supervisor Newsom’s change may be for the compliance, but said that he did not believe that Supervisor Newsom was going to try and maintain it at June 30, 2002. Captain Harvey said that there was two changes for the NFPA 13 on pages 3 and 6 and the Commission might want to consider changing that to 1999 because Captain Harvey said he believed that was what the Supervisor was going to propose.
Commissioner Marks said that she was curious on the previous page for exceptions for 3, where it says that any automatic sprinkler systems required by this section be installed in a base closet and it says that the system does not have to be connected to the building’s sprinkler alarm system. Commissioner Marks asked what was the thinking behind that and was it because of a certain type of construction. Captain Harvey said that was from the 1986 ordinance and said at that time they were just trying to get something for better protection into a lot of these hotels. Captain Harvey said that his recommendation now would be that he would not agree with that, but that is the previous ordinance. Commissioner Marks said that she was just trying to get a feel for what the thinking was at that time. Captain Harvey said that it was probably due to cost and at least having sprinklers whether they were tied into an alarm system or not provided more protection than no sprinklers. Vice-President Hood said that she thought to do the sprinkler system, which is by far the most costly thing, compared to tying it in with the alarm system and not have it trigger the alarm system just doesn’t make any sense because people have died in these fires. Vice-President Hood said that she thought that they ought to be connected to the alarm system because there may be some problems with tying it to this piece of legislation from 1986 so maybe it should be some sort of standalone thing. Vice-President Hood said that she thought it was going to be very confusing for people to read and understand, and stated that she is an architect and couldn’t understand it even though she is used to reading the Code. Vice-President Hood said she wondered how the owners of residential hotels are going to feel when they read it. Captain Harvey said that he agreed with Vice-President Hood that some of the other information that is in the Housing Code might be confusing, but once again the more specific will apply. Captain Harvey said that he anticipates that how this will be managed, will be that there will be a certain amount of hotels that fall under this classification, approximately 300, and each one will get mailed a notice, by certified mail, describing what the requirement are and different ways to write for requests for equivalency. Captain Harvey said that there is a section that says that the intent is if someone had installed sprinklers per the 1986 ordinance that the Fire Marshall would be able to modify, if for instance they did not have the exact design criteria required for an NFPA 13 system; it could still be accepted. Captain Harvey stated that if someone had done a lot of work and are maybe just missing a small portion of the design criteria then it would still allow for the sprinkler system to go in and maybe cut down a little on the expense.
Vice-President Hood asked if any of the buildings that burned had sprinkler systems. Captain Harvey said that yes, they did. Vice-President Hood asked why the sprinkler systems in those did not prevent the fire. Captain Harvey said that a lot of times it was a very limited sprinkler system that only had sprinkler protection in the corridors; if they had sprinkler heads into the rooms generally, it was just one sprinkler head into the room that only extended to a very small portion. Captain Harvey said that the intent of the previous ordinance was mainly to protect the corridors so that people could get out of these buildings, not so much to protect the property. Captain Harvey said that, at the time, they were looking at protecting lives and property to a degree. Vice-President Hood asked if any of the deaths that occurred happened in the sprinklered corridor buildings. Captain Harvey said that probably, but he did not have that information in front of him. Vice-President Hood said that she wanted to make sure that the Code is looking at solving the problems that have occurred in the past. Vice-President Hood said that she knew that price was a very big consideration from hearing testimony from the managers and owner of these hotels that it is very difficult to keep them safe and up to Code, but Vice-President Hood said that in order to do this, it has to work because people in a sprinklered building are going to assume a certain level of safety. Vice-President Hood said that her thought would be that it would have to be tied to the alarm system and that would be one of the ways that these 1986 systems could be upgraded. President Fillon said that this would be applied retroactively for the new Fire Code. President Fillon said that he understands that a lot of the problem with the existing systems is that they are old and maybe partially working; they are not required to update them as long as they are compliant. Captain Harvey said that they are all working as designed for the limited installation. Captain Harvey said that this is similar to the retro sprinkler ordinance for high-rise buildings where there are requirements or non-requirements for meeting the exact letter of the current Fire and Building Codes. Captain Harvey said that a lot of it has to do with the economics of the situation. Captain Harvey said that for these types of buildings if sprinklers have to be installed a flow switch to indicate water flow will have to be installed that will have to be tied into a fire alarm system, if one exists in the building.
President Fillon said that he was prepared to move a motion forward to support this legislation. Vice-President Hood made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Santos that the Commission recommends this ordinance with the exception that any new sprinkler system that is required has to be tied into a fire alarm system. Vice-President Hood said that it seemed to her that this is what smoke detectors do in houses and if this is not done, than the Commission is saying that the lives of these residents of residential hotels are not as valuable as people who live in non-residential hotels. Vice-President Hood said she would like for that change to be made. Director Chiu said that it would be a good idea to include that the Supervisors change the wording for the NFPA 13 to the latest 1999 edition. President Fillon asked if this would come back to the Commission one more time before final approval. Director Chiu said no, whatever the Commission felt strongly about should be included in this recommendation.
President Fillon asked for public comment on this item.
Captain Harvey said that he had a little bit of language that might help the Commissioners. Captain Harvey stated that the Commission might want to add something that says that the fire sprinkler flow switch indicator shall be connected to building fire alarm system, something like letter D.
Ms. Anastasia Yovanopoulos said that she attended two meetings this week on this sprinkler issue and watched the proceedings on television. Ms. Yovanopoulos stated that she was in the Housing Sub-Committee meeting where this issue was looked at and thought that the language was not clear enough. Ms. Yovanopoulos said that Jerry Cunningham thought about putting everything into the Building Code, as opposed to the Housing Code and there was nobody from staff to represent Housing at the Sub-Committee meeting. Ms. Yovanopoulos stated that she was concerned about that, as she did not know all of the issues involved. Ms. Yovanopoulos referred to a comment that Vice-President Hood made about tying it in with the automatic alarm and said that she just happened to look at the 1986 ordinance and they had plenty of language in there regarding the automatic sprinkler systems on page 6 and 7 of a handout that she received from Alan Tokugawa at today’s Code Advisory meeting. Ms. Yovanopoulos said that this was taken into consideration. Ms. Yovanopoulos said that the trend that Mario Ballard from the Fire Department and Jerry Cunningham from life safety wanted to put forward was not to get too technical because all of the requirements are already in the Fire Code itself. Ms. Yovanopoulos said that if the Commission specified the NFPA 13 everything else kicks in with it, as Captain Harvey said about the flow switch and that might take care of the technical part of it. Ms. Yovanopoulos said that some buildings might not need the full NFPA 13 requirement that is very strict, as there is something called NFPAR 13 and this is going to be a big burden on the owners. Ms. Yovanopoulos asked why only 300 hotels.
Mr. Ron Groshardt said that the Commission certainly had an opportunity to save some lives. Mr. Groshardt said that he felt that the flow switch is addressed in another section on page 4 and the objection that was raised was specifically around maid’s closets and where it could be tied to a domestic water supply; this has no bearing on the rest of the system, which has to be tied to the fire alarm system. Mr. Groshardt said that this would be a small-localized area. Mr. Groshardt said that with respect to cost, it should be pointed out that landlords face a 25 to 33% reduction in their annual insurance costs as a result of installing a sprinkler system. Mr. Groshardt said that it should also be noted that as far as enforcement goes every sprinkler system has to have the approval of the Fire Department and the initial installation is really where the enforcement has to come in because it is a construction situation. Mr. Groshardt said that he thought that process would have to be approved by the Fire Department and DBI.
Mr. Seth Katzman said that he represented Connard House, which is a non-profit social service agency in San Francisco. Mr. Katzman said that most of the organization’s services are in the Tenderloin and the 6th Street corridor. Mr. Katzman said that one of their most significant departments is called community services, which is street level social work in three locations. Mr. Katzman stated that those programs provide money management, case management and housing referrals to over 600 disabled San Franciscans. Mr. Katzman said that in the seven years that he has worked for Connard House he has seen typical rents in the hotels in the Tenderloin and the South of Market go from approximately $300 to $600 per month. Mr. Katzman said that his organization gets a deal with these hotels because they refer blocks of people and said otherwise he hears much higher prices. Mr. Katzman said that $600 does not buy a bathroom. Mr. Katzman stated that in almost every fire that has gone on in the South of Market and the Tenderloin his organization have had clients involved. Mr. Katzman said that in the Raymond Hotel fire the organization had six people become homeless and they are now temporarily housed. Mr. Katzman said that, at the moment, they couldn’t be housed in anything that is better than the Raymond, which was a halfway decent building with a developing community. Mr. Katzman said that he wanted to urge the Commission to support this ordinance of Gavin Newsom’s and said that he felt it was vital to prevent loss of life and to prevent more homelessness. Mr. Katzman said that he knew that the Commission had heard stories from the landlords about the terrible cost of adding sprinklers, but said he agreed with the former speaker, that what is not taken into consideration is the reduced cost of fire insurance. Mr. Katzman said that he has seen no improvement in fire safety, cleanliness, decency or the reduction of vermin where rats are common in the $300 to $600 per month average rent hotels. Mr. Katzman said that these hotels are in the same condition as they were seven years ago and the only time anyone seems to make an improvement is when the Building Department cites them and most of the hotels get away scott free most of the time. Mr. Katzman said that his staff is embarrassed for having to refer people to these hotels, which are substandard, by anybody’s standards. Mr. Katzman said that one important way to improve these people’s lives would be to have sprinklers and said that once again he urged the Commission to support this.
The motion carried unanimously.
RESOLUTION NO. BIC.-033-01
11. Review of Communication Items. At this time, the Commission may discuss or take possible action to respond to communication items received since the last meeting.
a. ADVOCATE Newsletter dated June 14, 2001 from The BOMA, San Francisco.
b. Notice of Public Hearing from the Housing, Transportation and Land Use Committee, San Francisco Board of Supervisors regarding File No. 010455, Resolution adopting interim controls that would, in the Mission District in the area bounded by Guerrero Street, Cesar Chavez Street, Potrero Avenue and the Central Freeway prohibit actions as outlined in this measure.
c. Thank you letters received from the public commending DBI employees and Director Chiu’s response letters to the public.
This item was continued until the next meeting.
12. Review 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.
This item was continued until the next meeting.
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 Santos made a motion, seconded by Vice-President Hood, that the meeting be adjourned.
The motion carried unanimously,
RESOLUTION NO. BIC-034-01
The meeting was adjourned at 1:45 p.m.
_______________________
Ann Marie Aherne Commission Secretary