a technical issue. as stated in the guidelines, it includes taking many items into account, such as migratory patterns, and it goes on and on, and the selection of an exterior building materials is a similar process. it takes into account climate, recycled content, effect on energy consumption, durability, effect on the surrounding environment, and cost, and that, again, goes on. and exterior building materials must be selected by ballots in all of these important issues. -- must be selected by balancing all of these important issues. i am here to discuss some of the technical challenges faced by architects in implementing it and some of the few technical issues that remain. the remaining technical issues in the document makes it hard to know exactly what constitutes a bird to save a building -- a

bird-safe building. how do you know you have a bird safe building until it is costly to make changes? i brought some actual samples of things that are being proposed to sort of understand some of the problems that we have. [bell] supervisor mar: if you be -- could be quick in describing some of the examples of >> i will be quick. -- in describing some of the examples? >> i will be quick. supervisor mar: you should probably speak into the microphone so it is picked up. >> we have had trouble showing this to clients, saying, "this will be the view from your

condominium or restaurant," as an example. this is the keeper since identity. dr. christine sheppard has been doing testing. one of the questions is what percentage is acceptable, for example. this is the 20% line pattern. i could not find an example, so it is a little more open. it is still pretty dense. there is an additional technical issue. without going on forever, basically in a glass, you have a low-e coating. both of these want to be on the outer surfaces of the glass. the inner surface. the low-e coating also needs to

be on a -- on one surface. this is a real issue. energy performance is certainly very important. supervisor mar: so, this, please summarize and rapid up. >> -- and rap -- wrap up. >> ok, this is part of the guidelines, but it is still in the zoning. supervisor mar: so please wrap up. >> what we need is more specific guidelines so we know if we have met the guidelines or not. both in terms of density, reflectivity, low-e coatings. supervisor mar: thank you for bringing the samples, as well. next speaker.

>> hi, my name is lynn, and i am a concerned citizen. i just want to say that i have been reading a lot lately about migrating birds. i know you know this. i just want to emphasize that they are making choices. they have different tools for making navigation. i just keep imagining that they are flying, flying, and they see what they think is a safe place, and they hit the window hard, which is probably a very painful death. there is the san francisco responsibility to structure buildings. thank you. supervisor mar: thank you. if there is anyone else who

would like to speak, please come forward. thank you. >> hi, my name is judy irving. i am the producer and director "the wild parents -- perutz -- parrots of telegraph hill." this is the knicks, who as a baby smashed into a glass windbreak on the top of the house on top of telegraph hill, smashed in so hard because phoenix did not see the glass that she went into a coma -- this is phoenix. the folks that found her thought that she was dead. they brought her to mark and me to bury. she came back to life. that is why she is known as

phoenix, and we have been taking care of her for 10 years and will take care of her for the rest of her life, because she has a vision problems as a result of that crap up with the glass windbreak. -- that crack up. supervisor mar: she is one of the wild parrots? >> yes, and the babies come out in september, and they are coming out now. they are trying to fly for the first time. they are smashing into windows like crazy. it is not just the migratory birds, but it is our own wild. -- wild parrots. i personally think this legislation does not go far enough. supervisor mar: what is your next project?

>> thank you for asking. it is about the california brown pelican. supervisor mar: sir, it is great to see you. >> thank you, supervisor mar. for those of you who do not know me, i am a wildlife rehabilitator, and i have also worked with the santa cruz predatory bird group, working with falcons and others. before i left the department, i wrote the first draft that this legislation is based on, and i would like to think the great work of the department in making this an effective and viable piece of legislation. i hope he will support it. -- you will support it. if i could have the graphics, please? i wanted to address one aspect, maybe in answer to supervisor w iener's question.

if i could have the digital projector, please? we do have a lot of data on falcons. i have a chart that will show you. supervisor mar: we're trying to get the graph. there it goes. >> thank you. this is george, a peregrine falcon, which produced years of breeding on top of the pg&e building in san francisco. those falcons turned into adult birds within a few weeks. isr to run over on the time, but we did have a little bit of trouble -- i am sorry to run over the time. one of the problems with these peregrine falcons is learning how to fly. if they can learn to navigate

the canyons and skyscrapers downtown, they have a chance of making it to adulthood. they need to learn to land, and they need to learn to avoid collisions with class. -- glass. from 2005 until 2011, here are the figures for the peregrine falcon mortality. in 2005, -- [bell] supervisor mar: please continue. >> in 2009, only one birds survive, and that is when they moved the nest. -- only one bird survived. in 2007, -- in 2008, george and gracie disappeared, and then a new set of birds moved in. all three fledglings died in building collisions, 201

mission, and in 2010, one of the four fledglings also died in a building collision. the excellent work the department has done in creating the board collision zone is great. it is a good compromise -- in creating the bird collisions -- collision zone. we would include the time that these fledglings learn. there are uv films. all of these buildings have window washing equipment, and during late may or early june, they can attach these things that cost about $1 per square foot. after the fledgling season, they can wash the wending -- the windows and remove it.

these are the things that are not costly and that i hope the aia could support. the cost of glazing as a proportion of overall building cost is probably in the 4% to 5% come and adding frigid glazing to that is probably less than less than 1% in terms of the overall building. to me, it is worth it to save a few bird lives for the additional costs. supervisor mar: 84 the data, as well. sir? >> good afternoon, supervisors -- thank you for the data, as well. sir? >> good afternoon. nothing is totally perfect the first time. reality is that we need to protect birds, not just from running into our windows and our walls but trying to do things like wind power, its center, which are also dangerous for birds -- wind power, etc., which

are also dangerous for birds. i worked on a project that had fairly massive glass walls that were put in force found mitigation, for the freeway -- that were put in for sound mitigation for the freeway. something was value engineered out, and i invite you to go there on a normal morning and look below the glass walls, and you will find birds, often being carried off by other predators. i think he indicated how much the glazing was for a building, and i have come to understand from talking to architects and suppliers that it is probably

made a 10% increase in the cost of the glass itself. you still have the mechanics of putting it up, but at the end of the day, if there was a bigger demand, it would be easier to get, and it would become more cost effective, so i hope you can pass it on with affirmative action to the full board. thank you. supervisor mar: thank you. is there anyone else who would like to speak? seeing none, public comment is closed. do any of you want to respond to the public comment? >> is there anything in particular that is of interest to the board members? >> i know that two -- supervisor mar: i know that two men were saying it was an either/or, energy efficiency versus bird safe, and then there was

another point that supervisor wiener brought up. >> we're getting some information on the energy efficiency. i do not think it is an either/or option. i would like to speak also on the costs. that seemed to be a primary concern. if you look at the cost of a two-story commercial building, all made out of glass, $11 million, out of that, a fraction of the cost is the windows, about $500,000. so excluding labor, it is about $250,000. of that window cost, the glass cost is about $40,000, and then if you think according to "the new york times" the cost of the most expensive glass option, or the two most expensive glass options, it is about 1.5 times the cost of the energy-

inefficient glass, a for a change in what they normally do -- energy-efficient glass, so for changing what they normally do, architects know that the construction costs vary up to 3% to 4%, based on a flux in the cost of materials. the ornalux class, -- glass, they won an award for being the most innovative, energy- efficient new glass products, so there are evidently other folks out there who feel that this is, in fact come energy-efficient. we might be over complicating the issue a little bit. in some of the other it -- other issues, i gave them a copy of the ordinance.

the simplest, least expensive option is our grandparents a solution, using little screens that keep out the bugs. those helped to make the glass visible. they also reduce fatal collisions for birds, and i do not think any project ever went bankrupt using that. another simple, common-sense answer, if you're looking at efficiency, nothing can compete with solid walls when it comes to energy efficiency, so if you are trying to decrease bird collisions, using more traditional structure. supervisor mar: supervisor cohen had a question. supervisor cohen: i do have a question, and i do not know if it should be directed to you as the experts, but i was looking for the standard for birds safety buildings.

i am curious to know how things work in new york city with the building trade buildings. >> the towers of light? supervisor cohen: yes. it is the downtown area, said there are buildings, so this is more of a curiosity. >> i do not think that is a permanent installation but something that is noted in the commission policy document. that was one of the things that drew the issue to light is that bird researchers would noticed the birds circling in the light, and they do not know why light is so confusing to birds. it could just be that once they are in a lit area, it seems carrier to fly to an unlit area, but the world trade towers of like to draw attention to the

use of light and how that affects birds. supervisor cohen: thank you, and i am very impressed that you knew the answer. a full-service board planner. supervisor mar: any other? seeing none, we have already closed public comment. i would like to offer the amendment language, and, colleagues, do you have any comments? supervisor wiener: so, you know, i think probably there seems to be agreement that this is inappropriate in terms of doing something -- this is appropriate in terms of doing something. in reviewing the materials and listening to comments, it does seem in many ways a reasonable proposal. i will say that our development

community and of the innovations like -- community and organizations like boma, they are usually not hesitant to tell us very vociferously if they have a problem with something or if this is going to cause unintended consequences, and so, frankly, when i first saw it while back this coming out, and i thought this could be some sort of big fight, and i was waiting, waiting, waiting to hear, and we did get the letter, and i very much appreciate that, and i asked them to be prepared to discuss it, but given my review of all of this, of course as a layperson, folks that i would think would be opposed to this have been completely

silent. i am prepared to support this today. we now have one week. it is important that we make good policy, and if there are folks who have something to add to this, they should certainly let us know, and from what i can tell, this sounds like an appropriate response to what i think is a real problem, so i will be supporting it. supervisor mar: thank you. so, calis, can we support the amendment without objection -- so, colleagues? supervisor cohen: yes. supervisor mar: without objection. thank you for coming out. could we do number two? my understanding is that we did not have to do that, without objection, we are recalling number two, and can we pass

that item with recommendation without objection? supervisor cohen: yes. supervisor mar: could you please call items four, 5, and six? clerk: item number four, involving the eastern neighborhoods plan. item five, . administrative code to implement the eastern neighborhood plan. item number six, an amendment to correct technical errors in the eastern neighborhood zoning plan. supervisor mar: thank you. and i think we have a staff presentation. >> thank you. good afternoon, supervisors. we are here to talk today about the eastern neighborhoods code cleanup. the plan was adopted in 2008. the complete ordinance included changes to the planning code, administrative code, and zoning map, legislation over 1800

pages, and some mistakes were made. over the last 2.5 years, i have been accumulating a list of these mistakes that have been identified in the course of implementing this plan, mostly by my colleagues. finally this spring, we had the ability to coordinate this into the legislation you have before you today. so there are generally two types of amendments contained in the ordnance, including technical ones with incorrect references or otherwise unnecessarily confusing text. second, there are substantive changes when the adoptive code could be more easily amended to reflect the intent of the eastern neighborhood plan. what this ordinance does not contain is a change in policy from the eastern neighbor plant, such as new ideas that come from the west soma or others -- a

change in policy from the eastern neighborhood plan. measuring how the stacks up with the plan vision. we think this will help us better address whether there are more substantive policy changes which should be recommended. since this legislation is a pot pourri and not full of substantive changes, it is not difficult to identify the changes. my hope that what was included in the packet was helpful to the board members and public to help navigate this document and to increase the transparency of intent. that being said, i would like to call a couple of items which i think will be of more interest to the public. first, because we had to do a emailed notice for the changes, and it is very difficult to explain map changes in a post card, i received a few changes. the providence were due to the completion of the eastern neighborhood plan. basically, we took a snapshot of the eastern neighbor and

probably in 2007 for a zoning map, and that means that any condominiums created in the subsequent year did not get caught in the legislation, and this action is to correct that. it will be changed to say. second is a notion of flex space. the route the eastern neighborhoods, mixed use is permitted on the ground floor -- throughout the eastern neighborhoods. there has been a lot of buzz since the one at folsom was to include it. since this was something supported by the plan but there was no framework for it in the code, we added in section 329 for the ability of the planning commission to do this on condition that they are considered residential for purposes of applicable control. it can only be on the ground floor. there are other agencies, such as the fire department and building inspection, which can only be on main street, and

there are other conditions. i think those are the two highlights. i would be happy to clarify. i also know the city attorney has proposed two amendments to be made. maybe i should try to read those into the record. ok. supervisor mar: ok, thank you so much for the presentation. there is no one in the public anymore, so seeing no public comment, we will close public comment. so can we accept the amendments on item number four, kazakhstan without objection? -- colleagues, without objection? [gavel] thank you. can we do these one by one? is there and a motion to approve items four, 5, and six, without objection? thank you. items four, 5, and six. are there any other items before

us? clerk: no, there are no other items. supervisor mar: thank you. meeting adjourned. [gavel] captioned by the national captioning institute national captioning institute --www.ncicap.org

hey, mark. hey, mark. hey. where've you been? i lost my cat. aw. that's not right. yeah. so i made this cat magnet to try and get him back. cool. does it work? kinda. [meow] nice. yeah. but that's not my cat. i gotta keep working on it. see ya see ya. see ya. announcer: anything's possible, keep thinking. get started on your own inventions or just play some games at...

>> welcome to "culturewire."

today we are at recology. they are celebrate 20 years of one of the most incredibly unique artist residency programs. we are here to learn more from one of the resident artists. welcome to the show, deborah. tell us how this program began 20 years ago. >> the program began 20 years ago. our founder was an environmentalist and an activist and an artist in the 1970's. she started these street sweeping campaigns in the city. she started with kids. they had an exhibition at city hall. city officials heard about her efforts and they invited her to this facility. we thought it would coincide with our efforts to get folks to with our efforts to get folks to recycle, it is a great