functionality. preserving capacity for stormwater and finally identifying the sewage on oceanside and north point. thank you. >> thank you that concludes our prediction we're happy to answer questions. >> thank you okay. is there a response to the city's presentation for the members of the civil grand jury no, not at this time that we'll open this up for public comment. >> thank you supervisors and chairperson i'm dr. max leno at the scene a recent retired scientists located in the south

bay in her mountain view i was ahead of the adaptation study for my center much of that lies between 10 feet of high water. i wish to remind the committee of the 2012 innovating national council report entitled sea level rise for the coasts of oregon and washington past perpetrate and future. the numbers posted in the report is 11 inches of sea level rise by 2050 and 36 by 20 one hundred it has large upsides that would be adjusted this can add several feet to our tides due to king tides as well as el nino's the tide gage records show clearly

the effect of el nino and in 18982 and 1998 thank you your time >> thank you. >> thank you. next speaker, please. >> good morning. i'm laura i'm with super thanks for holdings this hearing thanks to the civil grand jury for adding the enforcement support for the sea level i'm here to support the project we've no evidence of moved from 5 to 10 years from the sequa documents to a public conversation to prepare our shorelines i know that san francisco is enclosed on many sides so today, you've heard many departments talk about not only the vulnerability assessments they're doing alone in their areas of interests but working collaboratively together on a number of projects that are

considered leadership models for the region to highlight two super is working or working with the agencies here today as well as federal and state agencies in the ocean beach master plan on the open space and public access we're working with bcdc the dutch government and private partners including the san francisco bay area e bay giants to adapt the strategies in the mission creek and the waterfront we have the capital guidelines we're starting to work on the seawall we're part of the resilient collaborative on the rockefeller foundation that's funding to grow the conversation subtitling around recipients and climate change in conclusion i

think the grand jury recommendation really get at an issue that's he getting attention in our city some of the ideas are more readilyly implemented by regardless we look forward to the progress and continuing the conversation. >> thank you are there any members of the public that wish to make p.m. public testimony seeing none, it's closed. okay. so colleagues, can we go through each item and make recommendations for response supervisor tang >> thank you. i want to thank all the different city agrees that have come together to address the be issue and as supervisor representing a district that's borden by ocean beach we're concerned about the issue and have been working closely with all the agencies not only from

our city level but state and federal as well as spur to address the sea level rise with that, i concur with the comments made by several members from the adverse departments we have addressed the issue but realizing we're dealing with and a half so it is documents and sometimes, we really need to even engage in trial and error with that, said i want to go through this or some of the findings finding one that the city didn't have a citywide comprehensive plan to sea level rise i partially disagree the city and counties city was formed in 2013 a sea level committee that has a draft for the sea level access the draft plan was be presented to the

city administrator in may of 2014 and is currently undergoing review by city agency the draft plan includes information on the effected and possible sea level rise through 200 one hundred and the storm surge effecting water levels for the comprehensive plan to follow to be sure the resiliency and the draft plan will be acted open been the capital plan in 2014. so as with recommendation one a this is regarding whether the city should prepare and adapt a risk assessment for the comprehensive plan regarding sea level rise the answer is similar to in finding one but this recommendation has not been implemented but will be implemented in september 2014 so

as mentioned the city has a draft comprehensive plan adapted by the capital planning committee in september 2014 and the plan provides a fraction that can be used in southeast the development along the shoreline in addressing that reflex for recommendation 1-b this talks about adapting a citywide comprehensive plan for adaptation to rising sea level and the flood plans and should include a lifespan of each project outlined in the plan. my suggestion is that we say the recommendation has not been pledged bye bye september 2014 currently sequa provides that the planning department's with authority to require the

promotions be designed zoo to mitigate sea level rise. for recommendation one c this has to do with the resiliencycy if the reich's sea levels and through our planning and building department require that the construction project vulnerable to future floodplain flooding be with the 2015 project. i will say that the recommendation will not be impeding the reason being well, i'll say that the board of supervisors agree with the statement the city should build implement this it is adapt terrify but resilient to the 2050 projection doesn't influence the project including explore inform storm surge or wave action or lifespan and

location or failure of a project. additionally the draft guidance prepared by itself sea level rise committee will address this issue. and colleagues if you have comments recommendation one d this has to do with the city departments that are involved in the dames such dpw mta poster and coordinate the efforts to minimize any inconvenience to the public and address the certify few minutes this recommendation has been implemented while this requirement didn't officially apply to the board of supervisors currently, the city departments cooperate with various utility companies stafshd years ago. finding number 2 the city planning code has no provisions

addressing the impacts associated with rising sea levels without the appropriate provisions there's no means to insure a sustainable on land rising sea levels we partially disagree with the finding the planning and the reason being that planning department evaluates whether the proeptd projects exposes people to injure or dedicate as a result of the sea level rise. for recommendation 2a it should be and it should be again amended i'm saying currently this requirement didn't officially pertain to the board of supervisors the puc has maps

along the shorlz that are potentially vulnerable for protected sea level rise and the planning department additionally considers those maps in evaluating the flood zones under serial killer recommendation two b the planning code should be amended for public safety where it can't be protected while this didn't specifically pretender to the board of supervisors our response should be this will not be implemented sequa provides the planning department with sufficient authority to require the mitigation of potential hazards from sea level rise. vblths number 3 this states our city's building code with no impacts associated with sea

level rise i disagree partially again, while the board of supervisors doesn't have the jurisdiction over this the city agrees with the statement that the building code and the ports building code dpoo didn't include the impacts of sea level rise how have they evaluate the impacts required under sequa. recommendation 3 also talking about the building code and the ports building code this had address the impacts with sea level rise especially with strm rise and will insure the protection from sea level rise and also amendments to protect the most vulnerable system and be reviewed and reassessed every 5 years will require further analysis. the statement and the rational

being any further implementation of the building codes will require prirmgs changes and further analysis between of the scientific community must be performed to perform effectively policies and to address our sea level rise. finding 5 just states we engaged in a process to conduct the ocean beach master plan we agree number 5 we look at the master plan this is recommendation has been implement i'll note it is ongoing. the city is currently working with all agencies and finding 11 states the city has not set aside funds we agree with that statement i suggest we agree

with that statement but also note open the side while we've not set aside funds this is through the draft comprehensive plan the city will be taking up as we engage on future budget allocations. recommendation 11 a the city should start a reserve fund that will not be implemented the reason it is unnecessary since the mayor and the board of supervisors set aside funds on an unanimous basis in the something as a whole the planning committee can take up yearly recommendation b the cost and implementation of the adaptation strategies and the loss of the families to do so i

you go the implementation ass recommendation has been implemented as part of the harassed implementation plan the city identified the man made hazards and future versions of the hazy mitigation plan will incorporate the more recent work by updating the vulnerability analysis for the sea level rise. recommendation 11 c our city should explore more positions the various departments have received federal funding and in certain cases while the request is to find a success certain departments continue to look at the funding options. recommendation 11 d our city should request a insurance

recommendation from fema for mitigations and adaptation against future funding this requires further analysis the staff is pursuing all available opportunities they have and continue to do so. finding 11 states that reich's sea levels is a regional problem finding 12 i'm sorry it is a regional problem we agree with that statement. all right. last two recommendation 12 a the city through the board of supervisors we should cooperate our agencies we will say this has been implemented the yours respectfully, yours respectfully, from stakeholders from san francisco and san mateo and bcdc and california coastal and south san francisco and

others met in august 2014 to address the impacts open peninsula. recommendation 12b create a local combrup of stakeholders and citizens to feed into the regional group further analysis and we again, this is not in the directors board of supervisors we agree that the community and stakeholders involvements t is essential and the various city departments will fourth the best the exact nature of the outreach for that. that concludes the sea level recommendation >> okay. thank you supervisor tang. colleagues is that there a motion to table the hearing on this item >> i'll make the motion and again, thank you to the civil grand jury and take a moment to

thank the budget analyst and as well as the agencies that are moving forward on this i serve as the board of supervisors representative to bcdc this has been an enormous concern for all commissioners on bcdc it's gifted e gifrl to get a progress report but obviously we've got more work to do thank you for putting this open the forefront i'm happy to table this hearing and move into onto the recommendations. >> there's been a motion we'll take that without objection. the hearing is now tabled. and also is there a motion to accept the recommendations proposed by supervisor tang to amend the current resolution >> so moved. >> okay. >> i want to make a

classification to forward the recommendation responses recommendation 2a where it was recommended that required further analysis we want to clarify a report back in front of the grand jury in six months the same american people recommendations 3 again, the response request further analysis we want to clarify the report back within 6 months and 11 d where the response requires further analysis and recommendation leveling d. >> okay. thank you. and just for clarity at that time, we will call for hearing before the geocommittee that's why we're tangling the current hearing. with that, it has been properly move forward that we accept the

recommendations from supervisor tang without objection we'll accept the recommendations to accept the resolution and then lastly we would i'd like to entertain a monoxide to move forward the resolution as amended to the full board of the committee report >> so moved. >> thank you we'll take that without objection. the item is is moved and finally any other comments or motorcycle from any of the other members. i'd like to thank the civil grand jury for their hard work and thank everyone for their patience as we went through this process. i'm to thank my aid johnson for working on this and assisting me in reading through the reports a lot of great information in the report a lot of hard work clearly making this a reality

and thank you to all the departments for b.c. being responsive as it relates to the report and thanks to everyone a lot of hard work a lot of great things have happened in the city so with that, any more items before you will say madam clerk. >> there's no further business. >> all right. seeing none, this meeting is adjourned

>> good morning and, welcome to the transbay joint powers authority board of director's meeting on thursday, september 11th, and the board would like to recognize the staff at sfgtv who record each of our meetings and make the transcripts available on-line and today we want to recognize charles who is filming today's meeting and madam clerk. >> we have a scheduling conflict and therefore will not be present. >> and we have director lee. and we have the representative for the