poles legislation take into account the 9 hundred foot threshold for participation but if we need to increase that we'll tooshth that through the roll making process as well other issue the particular trench will create at risk given an anticipated future and again, it's the water and sewer location and we'll be again harmonizing with the right-of-way management system monitored by dpw and finally our proposal for producing the rules this will be a new type of pursue for dp but will meet with the public

including the telecommunication industry prior to drafting the specifications and i'll mention including the other municipal pope folk in the public works we'll publish those for 45 days and have another public meeting to talk about the proposed rules in detail and all prior to the directors final rules for implementing the directives thank you. >> i have questions for technology this will implement questions for the department as well as thank you for that presentation i'm glad we're moving forward i think this is a long overdue issue i will be honest i don't

think that legislation should have been necessary to get us here i think that we it's been indentsly frultd between pg&e and we're keeping things up and not laying a new conduit and i'll be blunt in my view it's part of the technology they should have been working and dpw should have been working together and it didn't require legislation although apparently we need to do that to make sure this happens it's frustrating to me i don't know how many millions and miles and miles of streets we completely dug up and recovered and i know they're not conduit

underneath there so i definitely want to thank you, president chiu for bringing this forward i'm happy to co-sponsor it i have you know tied into this is my frustration i know that president chiu shares the amount the city's dark fiber is being leased out dwp should be doing more to get the dark fiber those researchers exist and it explicit seem like a lot is happening when you look at the connectivity of the city compared to other cities it's embarrassing our infrastructure doesn't compare well, to other cities

amendment so i say all this in the context i know that d t will be issuing the registration and d t will have the discretion and i'll have question about the 9 linear feet and d t will there that and also to issue a lot of regulations that could potentially limit the unanimous of conduit authenticity laid and give the past track record i have concerns that d t may minimize the where its budget concerns or logical or onsite others departments are this and that problem and the automatic response well, if any departments obtains we'll not move forward and to me we need to think laying this anywhere

where it's possible without teacher of the year ulcer up the streets can you talk about my concern expressed given the track record and explain why i shouldn't be concerned and in to the. >> well, i think one thing we've looked at the legislation we have not talked about it it's critical especially with the other your questions about the multiplees varieties it's in the secti section it puts a conversation on them to consider the infrastructure during they're planning as well as dpw there's an overarching that's a new edition to the legislation and i know it's on. >> on page.

>> page 5 and i think it really makes the obligation of all the departments to include this this is an overarching thing and your question about where particular technical concerns will cause us to you know defer to other departments i think part of our focus is going to be to really challenge every assertion i've heard those we don't have those to connect with water and sewer if there's an emergency we'll dig up the fiber and will cause great construction and we'll have to repave the lanes instead of the trench. >> they're going to tell you

urge you to have to replace the whole pavement i'm sorry to interrupt you by i work with all the departments i have a lot of respect for them but we see with the pedestrian safety improvements i can't count the number of that times one department tells another department iceberg to pay to move the entire you water this makes it economically unfeasible and have push back to every objection and everything that can be raised until it's escalated to dies on the vine i have a concern dp has not done this in the past i'm not trying to be critical but dp has

mothers been pro-active even it would have been laid and we're going to hear the objections from other departments i hear them already will d t be aggressive and saying we need to find the solution to get the conduit laid it's not enough whatever department a says off i'm sorry, i see an obstacle. >> i can tell you we're aware and we're going to challenge every assertion of the costs and every concern i understand your presidential you at this point none of those depends are going to be proelz are not values concerns but we can mitigate

those. >> i'm not saying their frivolous concerns we have to concern how do we solve that concern so the two points in that regard or one i think that the mayor's office has a huge rule in to play here i see mr. xhaup we designated the mayor's office i hope they'll play a role and i guess the second point to you wonder if it's i'm sorry president chiu is there a reporting requirement here if there recent a periodic reporting requirement where the

department of item has to report to the mayor and the board of supervisors on a quarterly basis hear all the basic hear the opportunities we had and the opportunity we took and declined and here's the opportunities we took but the other departments objected. >> 50i8d to entertain an amendment. >> is that not good enough. >> john gibner, deputy city attorney that's adequate i've got the gist. >> to the presentation of d t what they said thanks and yes or had another objection in terms of the moving forward. >> we'll draft that after the

meeting. >> i'm sorry one other thing in terms of the 9 hundred feet i think so that if you have a small project you might not want to also do this but there's a cost involved i get that i i'm wondering why the 9 hundred feet as opposed to why another measure of feet and in terms of the department works the range of projects what percentage of road projects are going to come in under 9 hundred and what's the possibility to piecemeal that by bringing up the 2 thousand foot and defining it not having to accept any conduit sir, do you want to -

>> thank you very much for that. >> thank you, supervisors jerry department of public works streets and mapping thank you, supervisors a valid question actually what i can tell you with use and as supervisor chiu and my colleague mentioned the eye of the gi s based you know as the tool we would like to forecast those jobs out for the next 5 years 3 categories large and medium and small-scale as president chiu mentioned roughly that's 3 small city blocks in essence have the department of technology join in and a layer

of proposed work they would to see happy as the the layer is folded increase in the 5 year plan see where the cooperation exists on the short ribbons the 9 hundred foot deltas we would like to have the multiple lengths streamed together its cost efficient for the department of technology and ends up terrorism where there's connectivity and where there's porm a bunch of conduit that's paved over with no use and needs to be dig up again to give you numbers if i may briefly on the small-scale the total utility excavation permits that are greener one thousand feet he

pulled the date data for one thousand feet as of 2014 there was 2 hundred and 79 so small in scale overall when you consider that. >> every or under a thousand. >> we used a thousand so those are under a thousand so the 9 hundred square feet wourn ones. >> 2 hundred and 79. >> out of how many. >> i don't have the total number of projects but i can give you a synoptic of some scale penguin has 27 thousand approved permits currently in and around the city of san francisco. >> so that 2 hundred and 79 i assume that is when they trench in 10 feet to repair one thing. >> up to 9 hundred you're looking on an average of approximately 2 hundred and 79

out of about 5 percent. >> 5 percent. >> okay do you have any more obviously none of us are concerned with the micro ones but how many in 95 or 6 or 9 hundred. >> i can pull. >> i would be curious to get a breakdown range and how the issue the environmental protectional agency's piece milling question and okay. >> so how many are going to do 2 thousand feet of roadwork and not deal with the conduits so break it down into 4 or 5 hundred foot projects. >> right so that's when the

department of public works if we change a specific disruptions we want to avoid like for example, if we were doing that on market street not to impact traffic as a result of but other than that we're curious why i want to raise someone like it and discourage it my position i'm responsible for the moratorium that falls into my wheel house we probe when developers or contractors come in with those types of requests we actually understand the justification. >> right now it seems like i'm wondering if it makes sense that the department of public works were to have the ability to prevent that kind of gaming and i'm not sailg it's going to happen you never know and then i

mean one possibility to reduce the 9 hundred feet i don't know what is magic about 9 hundred feet is it a significance. >> we were looking for a general consensus not based on connectivity if it's going to be left open for a short city blocks not conducive to a standard that seems like it is fair. >> ongoing again, i don't know what the right number is this is not going out as a committee report i want to report this to get the data i've requested and understand the controls that dpw has in place to prevent piece male and female there could be

market street information but i'll hope for 4 or 5 straight projects on market street maybe denver invites that to not have disruption so each one is 5 hundred feet. >> that's where the partnering with dpw when it comes to fruition do you guys have the materials to do that or another part of the city that is conducive like a ribbon project and where that comes in so that's where the coordination between the departments. >> okay. so i'd like to get it data sometime this week and two other questions one is what happens if d t self-respond

within 7 days perhaps what's the consequences. >> if i may with using it we used to have that process before we implemented the gshgsz i s tool we relied open responses and nonresponsive was there's no desire to add in that particular area where envisit does the notice of intent actually moves up the chain of command within the agency when we don't hear a response by the time so basically, it's excavated to our aspire if you're not responding in time. >> in terms of this specific ordinance bus it requires d t to respond in 7 days. >> it requires d t to verify

i'm not sure you want to intaesht. >> part of the change in the approach is that the assumption at the end they'll have to do the design with the investigation we've published and so because there is concern originally that the you know utilities won't know what they're getting and have to design the market around the proposal from d t that's meant to address that issue so the verification is to look at the information you've included there so i think the - butt but if we

don't do that that conduit won't be included and so that will show up in on report that we proposed you'll know there you'd be able to ask. >> i'd prefer it not included. >> that's a check. >> so in terms of the i presume that d t will want to say yes or no and not let the 7 days lapse i know that the department may not be as resource full as it needs i want to make sure we don't have the 7 days turn around i understand putting a time limit i would make it next week discussion of 7 days is the right amount of time i don't want to lose opportunities because someone is on vacation

sanitation or the wires get crossed and all of a sudden we've lost a lengthy stretch maybe 10 blocks being done and 10 blocks of conduit i'd like to have those those are important legislation i'm happy it's coming forward i want to get all the details or the and we'll write a response and the other things i neglected to bring up this legislation like in the past was the credential cost piece that rather than sharing the entire cost of the trench our piece it will be the cost by adding the conduit it constrains the cost in terms of the

participation. >> that makes sense and my final question for d t open the amendment proposes giving d t the power to increase the 9 hundred to a higher number would is there a reason that d t wants to increase that to a higher number? average the overall concern of having a lot of stranded conduit we require people to put in in a piece meal fashion we have a cohort system that's the only concern if you prefer to keep it at the 9 hundred feet that will be - >> not overtly concerned with the conduit i appreciate that explanation thank you i also want to clarify some language if the determination by d t they're going to participate

with the assumption gits indicts it's going to having happen if it's negative you they'll notify the - i also know there are a couple of city representatives from eric from the puc and our chief innovation officer my comments you want to make. >> thank you aaron with the manager the any public comment? this has been a long conversation going on for years that the city and we've participated the in conversations with the d t to try to move this along our challengers are co-locating the infrastructure with the water utilities both water and sewer and had conversations with the d t and appreciate the legislation

allows the department to work together to figure out how best to advance the goals of the city >> i appreciate and i need to you know is i'm told what i mentioned i respect the puc they've been presented with challenges around street projects and recently had to resend a really problematic registration it makes it very, very hard to do projects in the street it requires to remove expensive infrastructure and again, it wasn't enough of let's get it done sort of impetus it is being worked on now can you reassure me the puc is going to have a can do attitude about

let's get the conduit we need it in the street the more conduit in the street the better. >> even in the time i've been at the puc over the last 1 and a half years almost 2 i've seen this progress i know i actually participated in the conversation to try to figure out how to make it happen and shown e spoken with the limp we understand there is a way to guarantee go forward and there's concerns and issues but we're having 0 those conversations to novice and discuss and problem solve with d t. >> i'd like to get the assurance indirectly from mr. kelly about that we'll have

significant challenges with the puc around some of the pedestrian safety consortiums i know that people are trying and hopeful that will work out but i have past concerns i appreciate it thank you and let me ask are there any other department representatives and let me thank the sfmta as well as the utilities and telecom that applied for permits and i also let me also take a moment to echo supervisor wiener's concerns i've been frustrated how to move forward with the fiberoptic strategy and the dark color strategy and many of you have heard me sigh this it behoves our city if we're

truly a 21st century city to hopefully someday be a leader but hopefully with the implementation of our policy we'll start moving in the right direction mr. chair public comment. >> one public comment card for excuse me. two for items 4 and 5 one aaron brooks for both mr. brooks. >> good afternoon airbnb brooks our city and specifically today making sure to represent the public in the coalition which back in the mid 2000s we pushed forward the brbd study and were the coalition that stopped our

entire wire fabric from being owned owe google and architectureing we would have had a monopoly service in san francisco thing i want to thank the two of you supervisors for moving forward this forward i found in the language city owned this is vital we do this like the fiber we built out is owned and controlled by the city of san francisco and that we build anti a fiber brbd network to the city as quickly as possible and viewers watching this look at the chatting nothing a gig exhausting nothing k h a t n u g

a deals with the 1010 issue of getting over a gigabyte of assess speed on the build out ftc is moving to get control of the internet we need to build this out quickly and get over the hurdles that supervisor wiener was talking about so we can get the economic boom that chatting nothing is xefrg to happen in san francisco in the next two years. >> thank you mr. brooks any additional public comment on items four or five come forward. >> i realize