ordinance and announced your intentions to consider a adoption of the draft policy on or after today so that brings to us this hearing. who is a national expert and researcher. last october at the commission's request, staff developed a draft policy document on standards for bird safe buildings. you directed staff to collect additional comment through the end of 2010 and revised -- and potential solutions to the problem. many people ask why should we care about this issue and it is a bigger issue than most people realize.

researchers have estimated the number of birds that died from strikes is 500 million amounting to 1% to 5% of the bird population. aside from habitat loss, buildings are the highest mortality source and if the use of glass increases and more habitat is lost, we expect a rate of the collisions to go up. what is it about buildings that pose a problem for birds? hillman's read architectural features to understand where they are located and birds cannot do this. they cannot see glass. they think they have a clear flight path ahead but they do not. the use of glass is increasing

in modern design which is increasing the threat to birds. so here we have an example of reflective glass and reflections can trick birds into thinking there is a clear space ahead when there is not. transparent glass cannot be perceived and leads them to believe they can reach a destination that is not available. given the hazards of reflective and transparent glass, let's talk about solutions. on the far left, an amazing building, the lacqua tower in chicago. a combination of overhead and livers. this building has a solid appearance and on the right, we have the new yorke building that uses footed glass which is

visible to birds and has aesthetic appeal. we have the skywalk with windows that appears transparent to people but as birds approach, the footing makes the glass visible. they allowed an outside view reducing the risk of bird collisions. the top left picture in the slide shows an excellent example of how well netting can work to protect resources while looking virtually invisible. this works well for repelling pest species that can deteriorate building services as well as guarding protected species from collisions. there is the covered window. as seen in this institution here. on the right, screens, which

also makes the building bird safe. other local examples. the frosted markings in the clear bus shelters that keeps people and birds from colliding with the glass and the federal building on the lower part of the slide. overhangs and other visual deterrent and on the right, a visual rendering of the transbay terminal that shows printed glass that prevents an open aesthetic -- presents an openness that it for pedestrians. these are few of the existing applications for bird safe treatment. these products are produced every year by engineers and scientists and building material companies i know there should be company

representatives that can talk about the work they produce new or options include the use of patterns which can be seen here. a surface that looks pretty clear but birds are able to see the markings on the glass and it comes in and also under development is a photo voltaic wall. these present multi-purpose options. now that we have talked about the problem and some technical solutions, that brings us to the bird said proposal to address the issue. staff have prepared a three- pronged approach. first is the establishment of requirements for the most hazardous conditions. next is education and outreach

and educate project sponsors and tenants. finally, creation and expansion of programs to encourage more birds including acknowledgement of those who pursue certification through a new program for bird safe program recognition. i will talk about the requirements first bibut beforei do, it is important to set the context so we can understand the founding principles behind these requirements. in reviewing the last 30 years worth of research, talking to the foremost scientists on this topic, it was clear that first, the more glass there is, the greater the threat which is a common-sense principle. next, a certain bird behavior is with glass -- behaviors with glass.

even there have been incidents of mass nighttime strikes, they occurred during the daytime hours. most collisions are elongate the sod with lush vegetation and reflective or clear windows. tall buildings and night lighting are less of a threat than a large windows next to open spaces. with these principles in mind, we worked with architect and glass manufacturers, and scientists to develop a balanced and implementable policy. let's get to the requirements. the proposal would place controls in two circumstances. first, location related hazards. buildings located near a large or -- open spaces or water. regardless of the location, certain design elements present

special hazards in and of themselves. there are some exceptions to these controls in certain small scale and residential buildings that we have built in flexibility into the policy and encourage the private sector to create new treatments. let's look at the controls in more detail. the first control or location related hazard, these controls apply to areas near open spaces, two acres or larger, dominated by vegetation and open water areas also known as urban bird refuge. buildings located inside of or within a clear white path of less than 300 feet from these areas but treat the facade facing the urban bird refuge. this treatment would be required for new construction and additions for the -- where 50% or more of the area would be replaced. in treating the facade, the trim

and is required for the area where bird collisions are most likely. -- treatment is required for the area where bird collisions are most likely. the area where reflections are most likely. further, of the -- the proposal would not require 100% treatment. the way the harm reduction reproached -- approach works, it allcontrols would be concentratd toward the ground levels. that would be up to the project opponent. building subject to the location of requirements would minimize lighting and would need to provide no up lighting or search lights. only wind generators would be allowed near the urban bird refuge.

the second type of requirement would be a feature related hazard. these hazards pose a risk regardless of their location because the present birds in apparently clear flight paths but are a dead end. what we have included in this category are three -- freeze spending -- freestanding walls and balcony's with one broken glazed segments -- balconies with unbroken glazed segments. there are some exceptions. keep in mind resources like all existing buildings would be subject to the policy of 50% or more of the glass facade facing the refuge would be replaced or if the new building feature were added. in this case, the secretary of interior's standards for restoration of resources would be followed and the use of

removal will treatments like knitting and screens would be encouraged. as i mentioned earlier, netting is used with success for past species and protected species. some have received preservation awards. other exceptions would include residential buildings under 45 feet in height within r zone districts. since these buildings are small and the risk is known to decrease, these buildings would trigger the requirement if they had a glass facade that is 50% or greater. finally, this is a very important aspect of the policy. in order to encourage the use of innovative treatments and make room for new technology, the zoning administrator is modifying requirements to allow equivalent bird safe treatment based upon the recommendation of

a qualified biologist, allowing for new innovations and changes in science. the second part of the proposal focuses public education and outreach. staff tends to work in partnership with the golden gate audubon society to conduct our region and increase awareness of issues. to encourage voluntary treatment and disseminate educational materials on designs and treatment options. i have the pleasure of announcing to you today that we are informed that the department has been awarded a $70,000 grant from the u.s. fish and wildlife service. this is part of the urban conservation treaty from migratory bird grant programs. the program was created in 1999 to help city governments conserve birds that live over

winter and migrate through their cities like along the pacific highway to san francisco. the treaties are partnership agreement between cities and the fish and wildlife service, conserve migratory birds through education, and habitat. we are pleased to hear about this news. lastly, during this presentation, i wanted to inform the commissioners and the public about two voluntary programs. the first is the proposal to create a voluntary rating system for those who wish to certify their birds as -- buildings as bird safe. the voluntary certification program outlined in this proposal includes three tiers and it is layout in detail on page 37 of the policy document which is in your package.

if the policy document is adopted, staff would work with architectural and ornithological communities to ensure the certification levels are set at meaningful markers and at that point we would further refine the details of the program. the second voluntary program is lights out san francisco. as you know, it is sponsored by the golden gate audubon society and the department of the environment that seeks to reduce unnecessary night lighting. the draft policy document and the birds if building certification program encourages participation in the lights up program and would be complementary to that existing program. commissioners, that summarizes the proposal before you. please note that in your packet that we have provided some modification to the proposed ordinance regarding the bird safe glazing treatment specification.

we made some minor corrections and clarification within the policy document based on the more recent public comment. i would like to make some brief acknowledgments. in addition, the draft policy document has benefited -- there we go. this is one right here. these photographs of local birds from local photographers. the office received a lot of input from department planners as well as our newt architect who contributed drawings to the document as well as a substantial amount of technical of vice and he is present here to help answer any design related questions. overall, the work on this effort has been and lightning to staff who recognize there's a lot to

learn on this topic and the research is actively continuing. at this time we're confident that over 30 years worth of research because creating an impetus for the adoption of draft local controls that will help protect -- san francisco protected birds as well as passing migrants. the resolution is to adopt policy documents and recommend approval of the implementing ordinance to the board. staff is available if you have questions but otherwise the matter is in your hands. >> thank you for your work. i thought you were in new member of staff. this is really great work. opening at up for public comment. david anderson followed by lynn

stein, lisa welch. if your name is called, you can start coming up to the mike. >> good evening, commissioners. i have a degree in psychology and zoology from duke university. undergraduate studies in bird behavior. i worked 12 years in new orleans with one of the country's preeminent bird collections and advanced programs where we took care of birds that were injured in the environment. i was executive director of the san francisco zoo for 14 years were rehoused a specialized rapture breeding program, the very important pangolins breeding program and a key: the of flamingos. i was for six years national

audubon society vice president leading the floor -- florida program and i am back serving on the order of the golden gate audubon society and sharing their conservation committee. i know a lot about birds and i know that -- the dangers that are posed by buildings and a multitude of evidence which you have had will presented to you by staff is established -- has established that. anyone who has a home or apartment with large windows at some time or another has probably heard a thump, a bird that crashed into it. it can do a truly wonderful things i birds save building standards. we ultimately are stewards of wildlife. the bird species that inhabit and pass through the city are magnificent and many of them are in danger. as stewart, you can enact standards in keeping with the concerns of almost all citizens of san francisco.

i urge you to vote for this item and i appreciate your consideration. >> thank you. >> my name is linda stein and i am an individual. i will leave the technical side to more knowledgeable people. i am here to say that things we can -- we can protect wild birds without having an negative impact on humans, protecting them is what we should do anyway especially in a city like san francisco that prides itself on being green. i think we have a moral imperative to do all we can to make our impact is small as we can so if we can remove human created obstacle's we need to do

so. >> good evening. i would like to thank you for the opportunity to be here to speak at this hearing. i am responsible for market development at arnold glass. my goal is to present information from the glass manufacturing perspective, to provide a level of confidence and insight into glassmaking and to make arnold glass the bill as a resource. i applaud the city for taking on this issue of birds safety. it is one that we took on 10 plus years ago and i see some synergy between what the city and arnold are doing. we are encouraging change. from the manufacturers perspective, arnold is committed to solving this problem of bird collisions. want to make surthere are thinge

done to glass to create the necessary additional markers making a bird friendly. there are companies in developing and using new technology. this is an emerging market. it is our prediction that as cities began to recognize and enact, manufacturers will react. motivation for implementation can be fraught with skepticism. arnold is taking responsibility for making this available as well as always improving on its transparency and its effectiveness in preventing collisions. we are currently looking to

partner with the north american glass fabricator which will greatly improve costs. we must understand this is a process. we cannot go from zero to birds base in a few years. adoption implementation and response time have a learning curve. i would like to provide you on 2 items that were in the guidelines. number one with regarding the issue of the less than 10% reflectivity recommendation, we would caution that this is a limiting recommendation and it is difficult to attain in glass production. the second comment is on page 20. i would like to recommend removing their reference to the cost. this is a changing parameter

and we will be changing parameters. this may limit the timeliness of the guidelines statement. >> our next speakers. >> i am a veterinarian and the co-president of the san francisco spca and i'm here to congratulate san francisco to step -- for stepping up to the forefront of the conservation issue. as a major urban center, millions of migratory birds fly over and through san francisco twice each year as they travel between breeding and entering areas. the city is home to large populations of migrating birds. both are at risk of collisions. both types of birds will

benefit significantly from implementing the standards. we find the proposed standards well researched and founded on the best science available currently. these are reasonable and feasible steps that will reduce -- reduce those risks. i have been asked by the humane society of the united states to voice their support for these proposed standards. thank you. >> i may natural history education and avian researcher. the scientific peer reviewed studies on glass collisions should not be considered because the studies were not performed in san francisco. many people believe san francisco is different but as a

bird biologist, i assure you that birds do not know that. bird species migrating through chicago or new york have nearly darrent -- identical considerations. their flight mechanisms are the same, the type of obstacles they encounter in an urban environment are the same. the only real difference is the fly away. when other groups come in to question the societal factor of birds against measures for reducing bird strikes, for the over 20% of americans that identify as birdwatchers, the volume is tremendous. birdwatchers in the u.s. spend over $36 billion annually in purser -- pursued of their -- pursuit of their birdy

happiness. our ecosystem would suffered tremendous losses on a scale we could only imagine. we are dependent on birds. in the 1970's when glass buildings became popular, we did not realize that birds cannot recognize class as a solid. that is why they flyable forced into it. millions of years of evolution did not prepare them to do with these obstacles. we did not know these facts than but now we do and abundant studies, mans prove them. i urge you to adopt the standards today. >> thank you. >> good evening, commissioners. i am with golden gate audubon. we strongly urge your support for the standards for bird safe buildings in san francisco.

a professor of ornithology and conservation biology has studied and published extensively on birds and windows for 35 years. he said, clear and reflective sheet glass and windowpanes in homes and walls of multistory commercial buildings as a passive, invisible killer of wild birds worldwide. among the dead are the abundant as well as the rare threatened and endangered species. expensive -- extensive evidence documented cheap glass as a source of avian mortality and a contributor to of robert byrd population decline. preventing these unintended fatalities will require education addressing preventive techniques regulating -- regulation addressing the installation of glass and buildings and enforcement of existing position to protect wild birds as a valuable natural

resource. weigh in have worked with the planning department to make positive changes to bird mortality. we supported the lights out for birds. this made san francisco the west coast's leader. this program has spread to over 25 cities. while lights out for birds has been a positive step, and has not been widely adopted. they will and for more people of this program to save natural resources, money, and birds. in 2009, the urban wind protocols were adopted and these call for property owners to perform monitoring to share their results. to date, no monitoring results have been provided yet it is needed as the demand for alternative forms of clean energy grows. last october you heard a presentation by dr. christine sheppard that describe the hazards of birds in a built in environment and i spoke about

birds eye's that have been evolving for vision during flight. birds fly into glass defending a territory or when attempting to reach vegetation not reflected in or through the glass. the standards offer alternatives and realistic measures to minimize our prevent negative impacts to birds. one recommended change is to reduce the size of the location related hazards for the urban bird rescue acres to 1 acre. this would protect areas adjacent to open space. these standards cover sliding glass when technology and other structural elements. a variety of methods to minimize the hazards are provided. the information is based on the best available science and can make cities safer for birds. please adopt the standard. >> thank you.