underway. you have heard about the grab bar legislation that was discussed earlier. the only other one that i'll mention is i have attended a few meetings concerning this maher toxic ordinance update. people from the public health department and also on planning are working on a redrafted version of that where projects would probably be required to do soil testing and ground water testing if they were in areas that dph didn't have sufficient data about potential toxickities on those items. that could affect how quickly we can release building permits because those would have to be certified by dph because we can

issue the building permit. i don't expect that to move through the legislature until january or february. but with that, that's about it. state wise, nothing is going on. as you know the state legislature is in recess and will be until january. >> sorry, bill. commissioner lee has a question. >> the shared housing ordinance, will that come before the code advisory committee before it becomes --. >> i am assuming, yes, it will go to cac for review once we actually have the legislation. right now we don't have the legislation. >> my other concern there, bill, is this, you know, the drilling. have you read the legislation in detail? >> on shared housing? on the toxic -- yeah, i've had a look at the current draft. it doesn't look too onerous at this point. it does rely on

dph and planning updating the existing kind of ma-her hot spots and a lot of it i think is going to be more affecting dph and puc, which may have infrastructure projects going on in different parts of the city and it sounds as though they are very amenable, they, the people behiepld the legislation right now, to having a self-certification process where those two departments can continue to do the work they need to do. so right now i'm not expecting this to become unnecessarily bureaucratic. >> is it based on, you have to drill at a certain depth? >> yeah, i don't know what the exact parameters are right now. but if your project got within a certain number of feet of, let's say, the ground water

aquafer --. >> would you have to get a conditional use? >> i don't know the answer to that right now. one of those things we can ask about. >> so in january that's coming? >> i'm expecting it to come back with another version. >> who --. >> dph is taking the lead with some input from planning on putting this together and there is a city attorney that's working with them on it. >> and it's just an amendment to the code? >> it's an amendment to this existing legislation that's referred to as the ma-her toxickity legislation. it's an

ordinance that was started when bill maher was still a commissioner years ago. >> item 8c, update on permit tracking system. >> (inaudible) project director dbi the first project is the public portal. we've been closely working with the vendor and planning designing requirements. the vendor has been configuring as we define the requirements then we've been reviewing with staff, people that work the counters, people among the -- we're getting a lot of input on that. it's looking very good. the next step is we're forming a citizen access committee.

we've already met the building and planning commission around plans for that. dbi and planning are in the process of nominating the members of that committee and we're expecting it to be about 16 people. the first meeting is being scheduled for january 30th. the plan is for this committee to do reviews of this system. about 1 to 2 hours a month for about 3 months ending sometime in april. and this would be a review rather than a user acceptance test. the other items are excella automation. so that's our internal staff product. we've got a lot going on. there's development in a lot of various statements, requirements, configuration, review, et cetera, and that includes the user acceptance test plan. we've developed that plan.

we're working closely with the staff to come up with test cases and then in january we'll have a kick off meeting where the staff will actually start executing those test cases. the next item is data conversion. we're working closely with planning and the vendor on mapping all the data elements from the current pts to the new ppts to plan for the loading of the historical data. we have a lot of different fees in the system and (inaudible) the configuration and giving the vendor input and moving forward on the fees. additionally there are scripts being built in the system that specify dbi and planning requirements and those are being built and reviewed. there are many reports in the

system. we've been prioritizing these reports and designing the specifications and identifying which ones the vendor will build, which ones we'll build internally. there are a number of system interfaces, including address, parcel, cashiering, et cetera. we are meeting with various different team members to define those requirements and document them. we have continued meetings with planning where we identify enterprise level processes, process improvement for what starts in planning, what starts in dbi, the hand offs between the two organizations and how we will work it with the new system. our next steps are we're in the process of putting fogt -- together a letter to invite the citizen access committee members to a meeting january 30. we will continue the development stages i explained

for the excella automation and the excella public portal. we will complete the test cases and do the kick off with our staff. be glad to answer any questions. >> so just what we got your list, we put our list together from the dbi site. have planning got back together with you -- you said 16? >> yes. >> so that list is put together now? >> yes, we're in the process of finalizing that and we'll be sending out that letter. >> do dbi, do we have a meeting before that to look at who's on those lists before they go out, finalize everything. >> i can check on that. >> yeah, it's important that whoever is on this list is a working group. >> we're in the process of contacting those potential members and then releasing the letter.

>> planning has the list right now. >> yes. >> could we get that list? >> i'm in the process to reach joan from planning to finalize the list. we get, say, 7, initially they come back with more than that. both sides get an equal number. >> 7? i think it was 14. how do you get consensus with that number of people. are you saying they are bringing it down to that number of people? >> i will meet with joan and finalize it. >> so before the meeting in january we will finalize it and they will know who's on our list. >> since president mccarthy says our list is together, is it just staff or does it include stake holders and people we look at.

>> one commissioner and also outside consultant. >> stake holders. >> could we see that list too? >> yeah, i'd like to see the planning list. a lot of people are going to put their time and effort into this so we want to make sure we have a good working group. okay. >> thanks. >> thank you, penny. >> item 8d, update on other technology projects. >> director tom hue, since pam is not here because she is home today, same report last month, i don't think there's that many update on the item. >> item 8e, update on q-matic. >> this is regarding q-matic.

i regret to inform you, i want to put a closure on this particular q-matic. however, we tried a few months ago and it doesn't work out and then my decision before is to put a temporary on hold. now after the discussion with the staff and also former committee to investigate on this particular process, that's summarized in my letter to all the commissioner here. i would like to put a closure on here and put permanent slip on this system. >> great, i know commissioner mccray requested to have closure on it. so this letter officially does that to us. okay. >> do we have to make any motions, take any actions on it? just executive decision? all right, good. >> thank you. >> thank you for pointing that out and writing the letter for

closure, dr. mccray. >> is there any further commissioner comments or is there any public comment on items 8a through e >> i think it's good to put closure on the q-matic thing. i know there was staff recommendations about what was put in place, it came from assistant director sweeney about how the fifth floor was functioning. it would be nice to get an update how things are going now, not this meeting but maybe at a future meeting we could angendize it and maybe have a very brief written report about what is the process now to sign in, the list, the line situation and how the supervising management is kind of keeping tabs on the performance of the various staff and how distribution of labor is going. >> commissioner melgar.

>> i'm also glad we're closing in on closing the book on q-matic. i'm wondering, though, i know when we had, we heard testimony from folks that it was an overwhelming thing, everybody really hated it. i'm wondering if there's a way that we could meet those things using technology and how -- and what the, you know, information technology's director feels about that and if it's on her plate or if there's something that she's thought about. it just seems like what bothered me about the whole q-matic chapter is that it's such old technology, right? it's like 18-year-old technology that we're just now implementing last year because of a very long procurement process. there's a way to do this stuff and we're in the heart of silicon valley. we could do better. so i'm wondering if, you know, it's not just between q-matic and paper, there's a

whole range of options and if we're considering any of those. >> yeah, indeed i asked my mis manager to look in to see any system existing in this state but right now they say there's nothing can do it right now, maybe in the future, but they still investigating anything in the market. >> nothing can do which, keep track of people? >> for example, not only keep track of people, multiple function, multiple flow in our system. permit processing is a little difficult. if we only submit the permit that means we only get the number. but meanwhile you want to function to issue permit, we have a number of floors and also multiple function. right now it's hard to find system to suit our needs, but we are still looking to see anything in the world or somewhere we

can find, especially in multiple floor situation where we can get a better place to have everybody housed on the same floor or something. >> right. no, i mean i appreciate that staff is doing due diligence. it's difficult for me to believe that there is no such thing. i mean, you know, we are unique but we're not that unique. there are other large city departments around, not just the country but the world, that deal with multiple floors, multiple functions, multiple departments. >> example, in oakland, they only submit the job. san jose also submit a job. los angeles also submit a job. it's a little bit different in our case. therefore we are still looking, doesn't mean we give up the idea. >> great. >> deputy director sweeney,

you were just going to say --. >> i think if we ever came across a system or heard of a system that's worked, bring it to us and talk to us about it. >> we had los angeles building and safety up two months ago and i showed them the fifth floor, they were very surprised about the ease with which you can come in. they say you make an appointment and you come in at 11:00, 10 after 11:00 and you meet the building inspector or the engineer, then you can go over the counter, but you have to have an appointment. second thing they were surprised about is some of the size of the jobs that we'll plan check over the counter. oakland, everything comes in and they turn it around and they give you a date to come pick it up. and san jose, as tom said, it's by appointment only. so we are kind of unique where we have a large floor

where people get off the elevator, sign a list and are seen in order. >> commissioner. >> you know, i think commissioner melgar makes a good point but i also have discussed some of this with deputy director sweeney after the q-matic was stopped. and i think -- so even putting aside the multiple floor issue, i think if we just get more of a report, an update about how are we handling the fifth floor? because i feel like that's where a lot of the action is. of course if someone has to go somewhere else, first floor, second floor, there's other issues there. there's a different way of standing in line in those places but i want to make sure it's very transparent if we just took care of that, the transparency for both the staff output as well as the, you know,

contractors, expediters, whomever, the professionals who come in and need the service from the fifth floor, that they feel there's a system where they are getting in line and they are getting taken care of, that's what i would kind of like to get updated on. we just deal with the fifth floor. >> okay. thank you, deputy director. >> thank you. item no. 9, commissioner's questions and matters. 9a, 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. is there any? item 9b, future meetings or 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 would be placed on the agenda of the next meeting and other future meetings of the building inspection commission. and as mentioned earlier, the next building inspection commission

meeting is on january 16th. >> okay. is there any future business anybody would like to have discussed at an upcoming meeting? >> i'm not sure exactly where we should angendize this, but i've heard there's still a lot of for closures or pending foreclosures in san francisco. it's isolated in certain neighborhoods. i with like to fiepld out what we can do in terms of outstanding nov's. some of this has come up in terms of the blight situation. some of those properties are getting auctioned off so i'm concerned with what, just kind of a report whether we know where some of those places are and the issue is some of the

buildings or some of those foreclosures have tenants in them and some of them have owners. and in many cases the tenants don't even know that their place is being sold until it happens and they get an eviction, either an owner move in eviction or something like that. this is something i just -- to see -- i don't know, maybe there's, maybe our department, it's not under the purview of our department, because we're always concerned about dislocating tenants and dislocating home owners. i'm wondering if there's some interface with the city attorney's office or other folks in terms of -- because i feel like, i've heard from community groups that this is still a big issue. it still -- it's moved out of some of the better neighborhoods but it's still a big issue in some of the poorer areas. >> yeah, commissioner mar, i

know your concern but i don't think we have the data regarding the foreclosure because we don't, you know, we punch up those data or --. >> yeah, i guess the nov's i think we do have but how we would tie it in, i guess, is what you're saying there, commissioner. >> right. >> deputy sweeney to the rescue? >> we have a list of vacant buildings and on that list often times the bank is listed as the owner. so we could use that, take a look at that. >> any other further -- i actually have -- thank you -- i have an interest. on my

project the inspector couldn't get parking and conversation came up and he drove around and finally got parking and opened up the discussion and i found out our inspectors are liable for parking tickets on certain criteria, whether we have placards or not. in my particular project, it's extremely difficult to park and whatever parking spaces i paid for and are used by my contractors so a lot of them have to double park and they are not parking in spots that are available to them. and i just want to kind of have the discussion, maybe if staff could kind of update me how much parking tickets our inspectors are generating. the big thing for me are other departments, like the water department, planning, whatever, do they have the same problem we have when they go to job

sites, are they (inaudible) more frequently than our inspectors are. something that struck me when i was talking to the inspector on my project. calendar that, have a conversation. >> is there any public comment on items 9a or b? seeing none, adjournment. is there a motion to adjourn? >> move to adjourn. >> second. >> happy holidays, everybody, see you at the christmas party tomorrow afternoon. >> happy holidays, we have a motion and a second. all in favor? any opposed? we are adjourned and it is 12.25pm

>> it goes back to the 18 50s fisherman's wharf, meg's wharf which was the place in san francisco to enjoy yourself. eventually fisherman's wharf moved into youctionv to where the explore or yum is and it

moved back up here. but in the 1950s, the port was coming out of world war ii, was trying to understand what container station was going to look like, and they commissioned a study that looked at the economic impact of the port to the city. * that sounds familiar, does continue, mr. mayor? and particularly to how the port could participate in the city's tour and commercial industries as well as their cargo industry, and specifically that report found that this area, since we were moving into containerization, were no longer really needed for cargo, that cargo would be better off being in the southern waterfront. and we would have this area devoted to more commercial activities, entertainment, dining, et cetera. and, so, in the early 1950s, the port moved forward and had the franciscan restaurant built. as part of that. and this area we are standing on was an old timber wharf that supported parking for the

fisherman's wharf area, of course, all the other restaurants developed over time. * and this old wonderful car ferry slip used to move railcars on and off of the pier over to tiberon and to richmond and other parts of the bay. so, for the last 50 years or 60 years if you're really doing the math, the port has been trying to keep regenerating our area and making it more of a great magnet, not just for tourism which is our core industry, but for locals alike. so, we really believe this promenade which, by the way, is a seawall. and you'll be happy to know that the old wooden seawall underneath has been repaired after over 100 years. so, all of you who own property across the street have another 100 years of safety to go. and all the rest of us get to enjoy that. and we truly are coming to where the land and the water's edge meet and enjoying it in a great new way with vistas of

alcatraz, new year's eve and america's cup. it is my great honor to welcome all of you and to introduce our wonderful mayor who has been such a catalyst for projects such as this. mayor ed lee. (applause) >> thank you, monique. thank you for being such a great historian of all the space here. that's wonderful. well, welcome to $10 million of great public investment. [laughter] >> even, even the skies parted a little bit for us. but i'm glad to see port president david chiu here to join us, our rec and park commission, mark and phil ginsburg from rec and park, doreen, thank you very much, rodney from the planning commission, thank you, rodney for your leadership as well. to present and past commissioners of our port as well, you've all been part of

this legacy of history building down here. and i also want to say thank you to vortex, the contractors who are here. they represent all the powell drivers who have been working really hard. and the great personal thank you to public works and he's the city engineer. he kept everybody together working with monique and the rec and park and everybody else to make sure that the workers, all 75 of them, working hard to get this done, along with our local contractors, matt hughey, thank you, mh for being part of this wonderful work as well. it's been long in coming. it's another example of how we use and how we have responsibly used our recreation and park open space bond from 2008. our clean and safe bond program. i know phil is delighted because we got another one passed this past november. it's a great part of our history. (applause) >> but this was one of those early projects that we started out. we wanted to reconnect. we saw the very piers and the

underlying part of it decaying. as moe meek so eloquently said, we have to nourish it, we have to reinvest in it. we got a good look at what we needed to do when the bcdc came out with the planning part of this, their contribution to this $10 million of investment. when we started planning with them, the bcdc, we honored that with, again, completing this wonderful project. so, i'm here not only as a cheer leader, but to thank all of the different elements that come together that are required to come together for successful project. and even as a few months ago, i know monique was saying, god, we've got to keep pushing, keep pushing on this. and we did. everybody came together and we pushed for it. we're grateful that the contractors worked with us to do so and they stepped in to