francisco? >> there are at least two in the room today and in addition to that i think there's maybe 20 or so in san francisco. but not all do surveys. there's one at san francisco state university. he doesn't do surveys. there are many others as well. so what does casp inspected mean? for a casp inspected sight, the casp provides a written report that includes a statement that in the opinion of the casp the inspected structures and areas of the site meet construction-related accessibility standards. if corrections were made as a result of the inspection, an itemized list of all the items and date of completion and an assessment of readily achievable barrier reviewable.

for a cans -- casp determination pending site, if the casp determines that corrections are needed the casp provides a signed and dated written inspection report to the requested party that includes the following -- a statement that in the opinion of the cans -- casp the areas of it have site need correction to meet accessibility standards. a statement of corrections made within a reasonable time frame. whether the determination of the casp includes an assessment of readily achievable variable removal. for all inspected sites, the tenant is reared to get a report indicating that the site has been inspected by a certified access specialist, which may be posted on the site. i'm showing an example of the new certificate that just came

out. it was just available. so what are the minimum requirements for a casp report? well, for a valid report, there has to be a date of evaluation, the name and contact information of the individual requesting the inspection. the name and address of the property being inspected. a statement of casp determination pending orcas inspected. when applicable a list of items that were corrected for casp inspected. a list of noncompliant features. a statement on whether it includes an assessment on readily achievable barrier removal. a schedule for completion of corrections of noncompliant items to attach to the report. a notice to the property owner

regarding the safekeeping of the casp reports and a casp signature and casp number so that's the very minimum. that's the baseline. these are some additional recommendations that i have for a more exrensive casp report. there are a lot of differences also, not only in the content of the reports but also in how thoroughly the surveys are performed, accuracy of measurements and the cost. so in my recommendations i include a summary of existing conditions and property description. scope of the survey, whether it's just the common areas or the entire building or some specific area. a list of the published standards, guidelines to which the facility is being evaluated. might be a.d.a. and california building codes. a list of noncompliant features. a permit history and description of applicable codes in effect at

the time of the permit. recommendations or options of how to remove the barriers. if applicable, an explanation of the terms readyly achievable barrier removal, technical feasible hardship, photographs of the site conditions. illustration of guidelines. plans to have building if available and items provided by contractors. the next issue is the construction related accessibility standards compliance act professions. also known as the s.b. 1608. this is where it's already been mentioned that you ask -- can have a 90-day stay of any legal action against you. businesses much had accessibility services performed by a casp before and i emphasize

the world before the defendant is served with a summons and complaint. there's a state legislative analyst opinion on this and it says that it is our opinion that a written inspection report must be completed by a casp in order for defendant in any action that includes a construction related accessibility claim to become entitled to relief under the provisions of the act. i think mr. gong has already talked about the multiple damages issue so i'm going to skip over that one. one of the benefits of a -- what are the benefits of a casp sur sigh i -- survey? you get a 90-day stay from taking further action. less likelihood of litigation if casp report is completed. certificate posted and barriers

are removed. completion of a casp survey demonstrates a good faith effort and when architectural barriers are removed, customers with disabilities will be able to access and use the services of the business and bring their friends and relatives. i think it's good for business. what is the cazzie or certified access specialist institute? it's an organization of california certified access specialists with about 150 members so it's a little bit less than 1/3 of the members of the casp or cazzie mention. its mission is to be the voice of access professionals as well as a resource for both members and public. the goals include be an authoritative source, be a recognized leader for knowledge

and imply men station of local, state, and federal sk -- access codes and laws. promote as a credible voice for quality standards of practice, and serve -- sorry. next one. promote access awareness, collaborate with government and advocacy organizations to promote access awareness and this is the casi website. so if someone does need a casp, that's a casi casp, they can look on that website to find someone that is in that group. the next thing i'd like to do -- supervisor mar: that's casiinstitute.org. good website. >> yeah, very quick. i wanted to show some examples of san francisco situations this. first one has some stores on

cleyent street. our project was permitted by the public works. they granted the permit and the city would not allow the sidewalk to be raised to the level of interior floors at each shop. even though this was the most coast-effective solution. it was blocked by a neighboring property owner. the next example is one that is on a hillie street, which we have all over san francisco with steep slopes at a store front entrance. and in my experience, the department of public works has been very helpful in working with their owners and design professionals in providing access solutions such as this one. and the third example is a situation where there was a very steep ramp on 24th street at a store entrance. and before it was 18% slope and i worked with the owner to

reduce it to an 8% slope and use power operated doors to comply with codes. supervisor mar: mr. nathan, what was the solution to example one where the city board of appeals wouldn't allow the sidewalk raising. what did the four retail shops do or what was the solution? >> unfortunately the owner has stopped -- as far as i know they stopped the permit process and i don't know what their plans are. they just said they don't want to pursue it any further. that was done from an architectural practice, not with my casp practice. so what is the status of the casp program? it's been in effect for nearly four years now. thousands of surveys have been done statewide. the california commission on disability access is reviewing

how effective the program is and we're fortunate to have a recently appointed member. and scott is a member of the california admission with us today. the ccda is developing a survey checklist for use of building inspectors, casp and business owners. and they have a new, improved casp certificate that's recently been issued by the state in response to concerns of casp. there were some language issues that -- it wasn't always clear that the site was maybe -- it gave the impression it was accessibility when it wasn't always the case so that was changed. so that was the conclusion of my presentation. if you have any questions i'll be happy to answer.

supervisor mar: thank you so much. any questions? thank you. the next speaker is from the department of public works, john, with the bureau of streets and mapping. i think the issue is sidewalk access and other issues. >> good morning, supervisors. john qwong, the department of public works. there's been a lot of discussion from the building department, from the mayor's office and various members of the general public related to the variety of steps that can be taken to mitigate to improve accessibility to entranceways for tenant spaces, for business places. one of the things that the department does is issue what we call minor sidewalk encroachment to adjust the entryways of businesses in order to provide access. usually what is required by law

is every accommodation must be made by the tenant or the property owner to make the improvements to achieve the disability access before coming into the public right-of-way. we recognize the city and county of san francisco is a very hillie region and there are some fundamental challenges related to the topography. in many cases we have many properties and many businesses on a very hillie street. streets in excess of 5% and in some cases, 15% or 20% where they're to provide an entryway. what we try to do as the department is to work with a design professional to identify ways where they can modify the sidewalk and the curb to provide accessibility to not only the

business but also to maintain the path of travel along the salk so someone in a wheelchair can access the sidewalk continually without running into on instructions, such as ramping. in the many years i've worked with the department, we have processed hundreds of these encroachment permits a year. quite of bit of them are related to disability access. there were -- there are other encroachments that we do issue that are not related. in terms of process, obviously, this is a situation that the department is usually approached by the business owner or the property owner. usually after the fact where they're in the process of a tenant improvement or it is the result again in many cases of a lawsuit, where they need to do something to make the entry

accessible. obviously we work with the design professional and as appropriate we would go back to the building department, as the gentleman from the building department stated, to find an equivalency in this case. possibly a power door adaptor and long additional ramping and -- from inside the property and in the public right-of-way too make things work. we do work diligently from our process. we do have a certain priority process if the improvements are specifically to disability access. we would provide some level of priority in those planned reviews. obviously the review process is very technical in nature and i don't want to bother, obviously,

members of the board with this. i'm here to answer any questions that you have related to the permits that we issue in this specific case. supervisor mar: so i just wanted to ask, based on a specific example of an ice cream business at 18th and geary that a previous owner made accessibility improvements and there was a sidewalk -- an annual fee or a fee that they thought was just a one time and there's a new owner that now is paying this annual fee. it seems that for a small business to make those improvements to make their business more accessbling? . they shouldn't have a disincentive by having an annual fee. why does the department charge the annual fee? what is the rationale for that? >> supervisors, in this case,

ok, typically, as i stated earlier, the modification of public right-of-way should be the last resort to the property owner and the business. what usually happens is it's become the place of first resort. i don't want to modify the building entryway, because if i are to build a ramp or do something inside a business, inside a building, i'm taking away expensive and useful commercial space potentially. so, again this is one of those things that is challenging in many cases of trying to find on -- an extract balance between what is appropriate and what is not. supervisor mar: ok. thank you. i-don't see any other questions. thank you so much. the last speakers are coming up. the next one is planning department. historic preservation issues, tim fri,e who's a preservation

coordinator. >> good afternoon, chair mar, supervisors. i just have a few brief comments but i'd also like to mention adam verrett from our staff is also with us today. he was the project manager from our better streets plan and what we found in our ongoing discussions with tenants and property owners, as this issue of disability has become more prominent in their discussions with us is this is not only an area where historic preservation policies need to be considered but the policies established realitied the -- related to the public realm, so he's available to answer any questions you may have at the end. when the historic preservation commission was first formed, one of the first policies they adopted at the request of the mayor's office on disability was a policy that for any city owned

property, whether city leased property or any property where a city program or function curse, the preservation commission and the planning department would not begin processing those 3e6r789s or entitlements until the mayor's office on december ability had, in fact, approved the accessibility program. and i can say that this -- that policy -- we worked very throwsly with the mayor's office on that policy with the h.t.c. and it's worked very well so far. whether it's any improvements after the memorial complex or most recently at the bayview opera house. aside from that, the department does review a very high volume of administrator front alterationings on an annual basis. most relevant will be around

union square and we have everything from large formula retail to very small mom and pop shops. our locally owned businesses around grant street. and one of the tools we most commonly use in discussing what alterations are needed nor an historic building to maintain the architectural character is the california building code. this is a building cold we are mandated to use if the property owner does request use of it and the building qualifies as an historic building. it's not as descriptive as other codes. it's a performance-based code and it basically outlines that if reasonable equivalencies can be found within the unique situation of that historic building, those equivalencies can be considered compliant for

that building. again, as you -- i mentioned, the issues around historic preservation but also dealing with the public realm. we are able to solve most problems i would say fairly easily. they may not always be a quick over the counter permit. they sometimes do require some negotiation or discussion or design revision with the architect and mr. nathan showed one example that i think was fairly example and that was the 24th street front. i believe that building is historic and they changed the slope of the grade, used a strike plate to provide an automated door and slightly widened the door opening was all the well within the participaterers -- parameters of what we review on a regular basis when it comes to accessibility in historic buildings. we also do struggle, though,

with property owners or tenants wanting to put more of their ramping or railings within the public right-of-way that does have a negative impact on the public realm and we struggle with them. not wanting to lose leaseable, valuable merchandise space and also providing an enjoyable public realm that's not only accessible but something that is consistent with our policies. a few months ago as this issue became more prevalent and we were seeing more questions come about related to these lawsuits. we've alied for a local government grant with the office of historic preservation. we were notified last week we were awarded the grant and the grant is more basically historic

storefront design guidelines focused primarily on a.d.a. accessibility. we hope to begin work on this grant effort within the early bring of next year. one of the stipulations of the grant is that we have representations so that we can all together develop a document that everybody has buy in and is comfortable implementing in the future. so with that, unless you have any questions, that concludes the planning department's comments at this time. supervisor mar: thank you. any questions? thank you so much. the last speakers are three merchants, susan walia of castro, computers. the merchants a.d.a. committee and lastly. risba from hamburger haven. >> good afternoon, chair mar and supervisors. my name is susan and i co-own

and operate castro computer services. we're in our 13th year of business. being one of the last speakers, many of my comments today have already been said by speakers before me. so i'll try not to belabor those comments and i beg your indulgence in hering meow. i disagree with mr. qwong's statement that business owners don't want to modify the interior because of losing space or square footage. actually, it's the fact that, due to the wide variety of issues presented when pulling a permit for interior work. making repairs to the interior of the building are far less expensive and expansive. i stand before you to talk about my struggles to get accurate information.

i fear retribution from their lawyers as a result of speaking up today. such as asking why they're asking for the casp inspection or other information that those lawyers are demanding. however, i feel it is important to be -- a voice for my community. i have many disabled customers. as a microbusiness, we cannot afford to alienate any segment of potential business. also, i could not afford to defend a lawsuit nor could i afford to settle out of court. as a businesswoman and a resident of noe valley, i wouldn't want my reputation to be someone who doesn't care about others. i am on the a.d. committee, whose purpose has been to warn and protect merchnlts in san francisco from the lawsuits that

be targeted small business owners. we've walked the streets and gone business to business to help spread the word. this does not mean you'll be forced to close your business. we've focused on readily achievable aequivalent facilitation as well as the casp process. all the proactive steps that business can take to make a plan for the larger and more expensive repairs that may be made over time in the future. but to these business owners we are met with sprigs. who are we to be telling the potential business owners about a potential lawsuit? an area of a.b.a. that they don't understand how it relates to them. the laurels don't want to hear about fully achievable or equivalent.

so it's hard to be proactive and positive when our government and casp inspections don't quite have a grip on what's going on. in our neighborhood we've had businesses obtain more than one casp inspections. the inspectors aren't sure what's viable in our city of san francisco and they're inability to look at the small things laughter -- rather than the large and expensive repairs is frightening. readily asheeverbl differ greatly from the standard of the larger company. the. repairs not being allowed to be made puts the burden back on the

landlord. the chasm inspection should be legally enforceable. a landlord and business owner ought to be able to show that certificate to work towards their efforts too becoming a.d.a. compliant. there need to be some industry standards. the central, state, and local entities know all about the requirements for compliance, as well as the changes in the law. however, the state has put a targets on the backs of small and microbusinesses and landlords by creating and combrup dating the law without providing the necessary information to the small business levels and by allowing damages to be paid to these litigants. we all know we have to go to city hall for our fix tissues business name. but there isn't a brochure to

warn us about a.d.a. appliance. that would be far better than implementation by litigation. there is the presurges that they already have the resources. a at a c. -- ccda committee i attended that point was confirmed. for san francisco small businesses this is not the case. here the lack of coordination between the city and state can be seen. the stit executives have no interest. the ccda was delayed for more than a year, waiting for their executive position to be put on hold.

if the state has these types of issues, why do the federal entities not see that the small microbusinesses also have their own unique set of challenges. why is it our right when issues are brought to ow -- our attention not met with consideration but because of the threat of the lawsuit? because it isn't good enough. i believe that is serial litigants are doing drive-bies in their neighborhoods and looking for the easy targets. it's my opinion that these serial litigants should be invested for -- investigated for harassment. they should also be penalized to build their businesses based on loopholes in the law.