and what to do about soil contamination - >> but i know it could take 5 months or a year. >> nothing about this ordinance would change the amount of time. >> because of the expansion of this i want to be clear i want to look around the corner and obviously everybody arrests with this ordinance but what does it mean to people who pull permits and find themselves in the new expanded area? that you it's our intention. >> it's our tennis that while the department of health is working with the applicant

there's no reason why the structure review could still be happening but before final permit is issued it has to be resolved. >> and i mean it seems to me i hear what you're saying commissioner about when the trigger is. because if it happens at a point for a smaller project is can create time - they could go through sequa which is a longer - >> if the project is less than 5 thousand square feet or 10

thousand square feet. >> i want to say that once we've identified this issue that there's nothing to stop the applicant from working with want department of health. and an applicant can be rovlz this issue before they start getting a permit. >> i think this is the right thing to do that's not the issue. i hear you and i'm worried about having seen the intentions of legislation vs. the legislation, you know, sometimes, it takes a while to catch up. and once we had a separate

process to figure out which tab in the database and having that done. for example, it's difficult from the conceptual legislative stuff to get into the nitty-gritty. i feel like they'll have experts on sequa we'll know the smaller guys not to

>> it's correct but again any permit application in the future if this map become adopted and any project that came into the planning department for environmental review and that's including projects if their disturbing 50 yards of soil they

would come to the planning department and see their disturbing soil and they're in the zone whatever documentation we receive that document would - would indicate that this ordinance exists that this project is subject to those remittance and that the applicant would know through the rough process they have to go through the steps whether or not they've applied for a building permit. it's not specifically written in the ordinance but that regulatory process through sequa essentially assures that an applicant in those areas that's disturbing soil that find out through the sequa process through this ordinance if they

didn't know about it >> i'm not an expert in soil but the general certain is the amount of soil that's being disturbed is very small. 50 cub it yards is small. if you go 25 feet deep you would see that. 0 so even if someone is grading the area their disturbing the soil that's impractical. i wonder if we can modify this if the certain is if the soil below this property is contaminated can we add if you're disturbing soil below a level would be more appropriate?

>> and that leads into envy department of health question people have no idea how long it takes the department of health to deal with those situations. it's more on the lengthy process than a very fast process. and it talks to pretty much any project would fall into this category because 50 cub it yards is little. and this parallel existence that i talk about is not reality >> i do want to point out about the 50 cub it yards i believe the truckload is about 20 cub itself yards so for about 4

truckloads whether it's foundation work or grating that's triggered. but if you're not talking about major foundation work, you know, four truckloads of dirt just below this threshold it's not big but when this was originally adopted it was intended at the time to screen out the more routine projects in the residential neighborhood and unless it was entirely a new construction project by not a typical alteration >> and if you're in the process

and i do find you have to fall into the process is it appealable? >> my understanding it's not appealable that's correct. someone from the department of health wants to talk about the debt or - >> i want to understand how though works. >> i'm from the department of health. a question came up how 50 cub itself yards is determined and the public health back in the day in the 80s it was felt that was the amount of dirt/soil that would be disturbed on a project.

i can't necessarily relate the depth of the contamination that you within the first two feet or ten feet it depends on the contamination. the ordinance takes thirty days for review and if there is deficiency in the report then the deficiencies or shortcomings need to be addressed and then we will, you know, you know, we don't take thirty days typically what we've been doing is we've been meeting with developers as well as their consultants. we want to know what their concept is and we want to explain to them what the requirements are of them in the ordinance.

we've been doing this since 1996 and then it wasn't clear then and you're correct for the leaguer projects there's a better understanding. and in this 26 or 27 years the department of health has become more efficient then we were back in the day. does this address all the questions? >> in the thirty days are you allowed to continue work and that means moving more dirt around the site? and 50 cub it yards is like a blow up so it doesn't take long to get to 50.

i'm at a job i determine i have to move more dirt than having yards can i continue my job? >> the developer through their consultant will estimate where the area of contamination is where it needs to be removed. so i don't know if - i'm sorry the disturbance of the 50 cub itself yards is on the ground not in the truck >> you asked about the permit i don't know what the permit condition is. so there has been times when grating permits have been

issued. there's determination there's contamination unless the permit is withdrawn work can continue in other areas of the lots that has happened. you're asking me do we shift the work down not that i'm aware of. things happen quickly we meet with the developer, their consultant they make the determination of the turn around time and the analysis of their sample. motion folks go two weeks to save money. the department of health site is thirty days >> director tom, i have a way

of this ordinance we have a meeting we have paul and kari and generally overall departments put this ordinance it's a good ordinance. let me explain from previously how the permit process with this t is generally in a limited area mostly a large promise project. at the gas stations they go to department of health and before they get a building permit. now because of this overall with the citywide area we've got our pbs system we can't track that area. one of the solution is to talk to planning they should first go to planning to find which area

they require to go through this study. to do the study everybody know the time when i request a report how to mitigate the soil and underground water i'm not an expert. i recommend he department of health have a station. a basis station on the fifth floor station thirty they can send someone to answer the questions and they can do some permit progressing and then hopefully by the end of the year with the pbs system and to check out by next year, we, do

something. we've all this stuff i recommend all the - to check out the development first. for me, the way i see the hazard materials take a year to mitigate and all those, you know, it's not only underground the surface how does it go that's what we recommend maybe at that time we send information inform developer and owner >> i'm a developer i understand it i'm concerned about the smaller people here and i don't have to move the dirt from the site. you could be - >> it's disturbing 50 cub

itself yards so - >> and maybe acting director if you could explain it to me if i'm digging down to get my footings and i have to mitigate and i compliment to the department are you going to come out and inspect my project which could take thirty days and is the department going to go out and continual inspect why is this done parallel? >> i'll - generally, we look at the site and the call section

and measure it and inform them all. by the time i are doing inspection we don't, hard to measure because the soil when you get open the ground they expand to 23 or 3 times >> well, maybe somebody in next door calls the department of health and they say i think it's more than 50 yards and where does the department stand in going to that project. it that project going to be stopped until this is mitigated? >> no, we resend to department of health we can't stop it because they measure is and do the approval at the time. >> okay come back to temporary

solution i suggest to go to planning and then the developer or anyone who need to make sure, you know, require to do that study. then second item is department of health come to our station on the fifth floor to answer all those questions and check the area or maybe issue the letter right there to speed up the process. then they also future our pbs system can put in another safeguard. the permit is - you may be, you know, depend upon the size of project

>> just one question. how many staff inspectors have to deal with this? >> we have half 0.5 currently. >> so you're going to expand the whole program? >> definitely not. we're still looking at the anticipated number of projects and we'll be developing our staff at that time, but we are currently staffing with zero .5 staff >> just a clarification does that half time f t also have other responsibilities? >> yes, a their you assigned to other projects.

>> how is that position paid for . >> it's a grant funded position excuse me. it's a contract with the state water resources control board. >> and is that for whatever rain the funding dries up what what happens? >> i'm not sure. >> we could be looking for answers and we don't have a person to address - i mean seems to me if we're relying on the department of health to be the entity to whether it is hazardous or not we may get into a logjam.

>> i very much appreciate that and it is fully the department of health will have staff people to see about this code but future where this person is funded we can't know but, of course, there will be someone to measure those codes. no one wants to not have a person on the other end of the phone >> i'm in charge of the health inspectors. the way it looks like the program is starting to be reduced. so we think that our half time person we have working on l o p

plus site mitigation that person will have less responsibility for working for l o p. >> when do you expect this to be implemented into law? >> so it's likely if this legislation continues through this process that 3 would be up to the board of supervisors in mid-june. because it's an ordinance it has a thirty today detailed date so mid-july >> so you'll be fully staffed to deal with pretty much the expansion of this whole program. >> it will be every tennis to

have the staffing under this code to take care of business. >> i tried to make this point earlier i guess i want to reiterate. we don't expect this to be more today or it will not change it's the same amount of work but it will be done pursuant to code rather than some by code and some by sequa. there won't be changes >> and i think the thirty day notice and those requirements are going to be done even though we're pretty much i'm combeen if i were to take 10 projects in

those new zones i imagine 7, 8 or 9 be involved in this program. >> they - can i testify how many invests you did this year on this? >> with site mitigation cases like as you're a developer you have multiple projects all in states of projection. my oversight program we have 1.5 f t e cases with 50 cases.

we are currently 65 cases we're working on. the large amount of time is in the review of the reports. we're trying to meet more with the consultants and go over their plan of action. and we sit down and discuss what the options that they're looking at for the mitigation of the hazard. it maybe removal or an engineer cap. that's the number of cases we're currently dealing with >> i appreciate the department of health being in the mix of this i think you make information available and educate folks but, you know, in

the real world in the development of san francisco i think that making it part of the code is smart because it will increase the workload of the department of health. i think - this is why is when things have to go through t a sequa process there's a handful of people who pay attention to this. in terms of codes and building permits it's every neighbors in that property. people do check argue website. it becomes much more real on the ground in the way it the sequa process is a little bit more removed. so i don't believe that will be

the case that your workload will retain the same that it is part of the code. i mean, we'll see. like anything else once we get into it and make the forms available we'll see how it progresses and i hope - you know, so we don't bring a whole other level of hardship to developers and folks who are doing this and so things move smoothly >> thank you. is there any more comment on this item? do we open up to public comment? >> is there a public comment on this item? seeing none we need to motion to

vote on >> i'm sorry are we voting to pass this on? >> to the board of supervisors yes. >> just as we're missing two commissioners here two i want to acknowledge that so - commissioner walker and commissioner lee had to leave. so we can vote on this now or wait until full commission that's pretty much where i would be >> even though i didn't speak earlier i share some of the concerns about the issues that were raised. i don't want to back up of the

people doing the work and without, you know, being up front about it i'm concerned with our ability to manage the department of health - the department of health ability to manage this thing >> so why don't we do this we'll continue this to the next meeting and obviously we can think about it and maybe if we had some more questions. i would have questions on the staffing and the direction there. i would have questions about the timeframe to do this in the field. if you knew you had projects that took a certain time to do. and where staff would stand if the project didn't have