. >> good morning - good

afternoon the meeting will come to order this is the regular meeting of the land use commission i'm malia cohen chair of the committee to my right is the vice chair 63 and jane kim this is our clerk ms. andrea ashbury. >> thank you john both john's for helping us with sfgovtv. >> madam clerk, any announcements? completed speaker cards and documents to be included should be submitted to the clerk. items acted upon today will appear on the march third 2015 board of supervisors agenda unless otherwise stated thank you very much could you please call item one. >> an ordinance for the environmental code. >> thank you. i'm the author of item one as a reminder last year, i introduced to champion pieces of legislation this strengths the cities

construction and development impact on residents air quality in the city the first thing was unanimously passed when i the board required combrasz combalsz ventilation inside the hot spot zone this requires an emissions minimumtion plan and monitoring program for all public projects in the hot spot condone requiring the equipment to minimize the emotion some studies have shown an association with particularly matter and significant health problems that combludz u includes the chronic brooklyn kits and reduced function and heartache and premature dedicate in people with premature health

conditions the south eastern district suffers if air pollution that's why we have the asthma and the city of san francisco could a reduce the emissions by utilizing the off-road disease sale an road or whatever position using alternative source of power it's important to note that clean construction mitigation has been a requirement at ceqa and states projecting in the hot zone will be using cleaner requirements by the standard of our city projects we're streamlining the process for public projects

previously we would do a separate air quality analysis to tell us what we already know and impose the mitigation measures adding time and measures for the mitigating process now i'm going to bring up staff from the planning department i think we have w5id and department of public health karen to briefly go over thank you go over with us a little bit about the legislation so it's at staff short presentation. >> thank you. >> i'm karen on behalf of the health department to offer our support and reiterate the things that supervisor just told you all i know i've shown this committee if f this graphic before and the purpose of this graphic from e ta to really enforce the information caused by

particularly matter and dell sale it caused cardiovascular disease a good illumination i want to point out that part of failure heart conditions and stroke are leading can you of death in the tape 5 causes of death for san franciscans if we look at 24 this is the age adjustment hospitalization rate for heart failure it looks at like the exposure zone the north and south of market and the bayview hunters point and now you'll see the same type of profile of where we're concerned about so it is important furriers as an environmental standpoint and do want the construction adding the diesels

emotions by the air quality the management of that ordinance will prevent this from happening the air district as had several be reports in 2010 was an air plan the two key facts i've learned from the plans par complainant matters is the smaller dynamic those fine par tickets pose the greatest burden on the bay area and they account for more than 90 percent of immortality in the area if we look at the paralyze from the diesel fuel we have the carr gunmen and its responsible for over 80 percent of cancer risks

if toxic air contaminates in the area i appreciate our support. >> wade would you like to comment. >> i have a short presentation so good afternoon mr. sweeney and i'm wade from the san francisco planning department as supervisor cohen mention this is about protecting the public health awhile providing certainty to the projection for public agency projects this ordinance lions with the city projects to ceqa both this ordinance along with article 38 have a bigger

strategy which the planning department and dpw are working on to produce less carcinogens we have support if the planning commission and the environmental commission so just a little bit of background quickly on the existing ordinance acknowledging it the harmful health effects we took action and adapted the ordinance the ordinance requires cleaner construction equipment already and is enforced by different contracting public works agencies the heart of the ordinance relate relates to either a engine or verified emission strategy the acronym the epa and california resources started to reblth the amount of

regulations from the 190's this chart illustrates there are four tier levels the equipment becomes cleaner and the standards stricker i want to highlight tier two the existing ordinance this is applied to new engines on not applying to existing equipment but existing equipment lasts 15 to 25 years it has been adapted a separate regulation. >> do you have a copy of your presentation. >> i do. >> can i have it please. yes

yes. >> sorry i know some of the numbers on this chart maybe a little bit hard to read the numbers are not as important as illustrating the point of the different standards that apply to new engines over the equipment it has gone cleaner i was mentioning for this only applies to new engines and existing equipment there's a regulation that went into effect just last year i'm going i'm not sure e i'm sorry 2013 companies will closely clean up their equipment's one of the ways through the verified emission control strategy it is a filter you can put on the existing engine to reduce the matter especially further so if you look at the orange and you have a tier two engines a new engine

and in 2004 let's say and you put a filter on it that reduce the matter emissions tiring percent beyond the tier 2 engine and how this relates to ceqa it subsequent to page of the ordinances in 2007 in the bay area management district released new guidance are documented the harmful health effects from the air pollution month jurisdictions in san francisco claremont the air quality with ceqa this required the construction projects in san francisco the hire consultant to have a costly modeling it requires the pub funded projects

beyond the construction ordinance this requirement was often imposed on projects subsequent to ceqa when you have a mitigates project under ceqa the projects will not be otherwise exempt this arrow if you have an project that is exempt and have a mitigation you have to do a 3450ig9sd eir the planning and dpw created a map i'm going to talk about it we talked about that for article 38 essentially for construction if you're project is locked in the zones your subject to a ceqa mitigation measure as an example the planning department currently is reviewing for ceqa public projects foreclosure a health

clinic in the bay area they'll be exempt from ceqa with you it's in the exposure zone tlofrs it is subject to cost and time and in order to understand the ceqa the planning department has identified the mitigation measures that was done in outreach this chart here is actually brand new data i got from the california air resources board we originally did research in 2012 but this year chart shows essentially new engines become available as the economy picked up so when the recession hit not a lot of new engines we get the

question why are we not requiring the tier 4 engines the reason we don't think it's feasible because the tier 4 engine are not wildly available shown in light pie chart that document 20 to 15 percent of the engines in the state for the tier four if you require tier 2 it's 60 percent and by requiring that verified diesels emotion our that equivalent to a tier 4 engine the real changes i've described as for ceqa outside the air pleasant our subject to the existing requirements and inside the x portion you're a tier two engine and administrative review control strategy there's a

monitoring plan associated that this i'll briefly cover so first and foremost this is a health protective ordinance between the emissions reductions compared to a engine that has not emission standard or flexibility through ceqa the mitigation measures is not required but required for city regulation for example the earlier health clinic can precede with the mitigation and it allows for a greater ability to monitor for compliance the state has a regulation that requires all construction equipment to have a 6 character red sticker on both sides of the equipment and a members of the public or someone if the city agency can written down the

number and go online and see whatever it's tier one or four so the planning department courageous you to adopt the update i'm happy to answer any questions you may have. >> thank you very much for if presentation supervisor kim. >> sorry was having mike issues thank you supervisor cohen for introducing that really important legislation i'd like to be added as a cory had a question not sure if directed to public health or planning this is a great step up to the plate we have should legislation we've seen the uptick of construction

in large swaths of districts that was put up the power point presentation i have a number of questions on the important piece i think that what we're putting for legislation is really good, i want to know what we're going to do to have the resources and staffing commissioner that we can enforce this on, on contractors things like not leaving diesel trucks in the i would like and things to put into place within the contract itself to insure those violations are nothing go to the happen in the first time and two there are complaints you know what are the resources the city has to insure that the contractors are compliant. the court: again, i support everything this is in here we have a number of ordinances on

the boxes our residents have a right to call our office and complain about and we have the resources to properly takeover of that. >> no questions or statements. >> that's a question. >> is the question do we have the resources actually. >> i asked two questions one are we thinking of putting things in place n the public project that insures in advance that there are specific measures to make sure that the contractors comply with the prevention there isn't a violation a and b if there is what resources do we have to enforce legislation. >> all right. >> supervisor kim through the chair on the enforcement side of things in developing this ordinance and the research we did a lot of outreach to all the

city agencies that are going to be subject to accident ordinance and dunn done education that question has come up with every individual agency we develop in doing this outreach is sort of a template for a plan the ordinance tukdz about the construction emissions plan and we developed basically an "x" sell spreadsheet and the contractors can fill out and maintain through the construction the hope the owners passes we continue our educational efforts with each of the individuals agency because some individual agencies have been subject to this through ceqa and they've had some similar questions of how are they going to monitor right now the

planning department is monitoring it through ceqa and we're trying to educate them on this so in terms of resources i don't really each year additional resources from the city agrees more of a educational understanding of the requirement in terms of compliance yeah. - in terms of inclines it is subject to each individual agency and actually drawing a blank on what the ordinance specifically says in terms of in if a incarcerating is in compliance with the plan i believe it says they could subject to no longer having the contracts you know. >> okay. so sorry i was trying to pull up the ordinance so the enforcement body is each agency.

>> correct. >> it's not the department of public health so we'll have to find out which agency contracted it whether dpw and they'll be responsible for sending someone out to enforce the legislation but the punitive measures at the ended e he said the contract. >> i'll have to relook at the english i think this is essentially what it does you does it feel like the right punitive measure i don't know what agency is going to stop a project when the street is torn up we're going to take this contract and leave the neighborhood you know in sham he lives in the meantime and there are things built to into the ordinance that allows for waivers if a particular piece of equipment is not available the contractor california for a

waiver from that particular requirement i would have to relook at what the ordinance legislation says and excuse me. the legislation digest has a quarterly reporting so the public has a public record for consultants. >> the st. john gibner would like to comment. >> john gibner, deputy city attorney like to follow up on the possibility it didn't go to our question supervisor jane kim about how the departments are admonishment but in terms of what the remedies are the contract for the project will exterior the contractor comply with the construction so non-compliance will mean

suspension or the contract or - or for potentially departure time a process that follows a hearing so a ranger of options and also non-payment we can suspend payment to the contractor so there are ways to terminate the contract permanently. >> do the agency feel like they've got the capacity i like the ordinance i know our office on a daily process gets e-mails from the public regarding violations to the planning code and they're real violations and follow-up with the departments they don't have the resources to actually enforce against the violator so it becomes a

frustration within the law enforce the law and we get kind of or you know non-responses from the department it's not their fault they don't have the resources that's why i'm sensitive to think about the enforcement in general. >> i just want to make sure the proper things are in place the neighborhoods get what they deserve cleaner and greener contradiction to make sure as the the outcome. >> agreed and just specifically section 25.40 talks about enforcement for in the ordinance but in terms of individual city agencies worrying about the resources to be able to enforce i haven't heard that specifically but that is a concern and