>> meeting will come to order. >> now we are ready to go. >> good morning, the meeting will come to order this is a special meeting of the government and oversight committee for may, 7, 2015. and i am supervisor yee and to my right is christensen and to my left is supervisor breed, and the electricker is erica major and we would like to acknowledge the staff at sfgtv.

who record each of the meetings and makes the transcripts available for the public on-line and do you have any announcements? >> make sure that you silence all cell phones and speaker cards should be submitted to the clerk items today will be appear on the may 19th board of supervisor's agenda unless otherwise stated. >> okay. could you please call the first item? >> item one s a hearing to receive updates from various city departments required to provide a response on the implementation of recommendation three and 12 b on cained in the 13, 14, civil grand jury report entitled rising sea levels at our doorstep, is there anyone from the civil grand jury that would like to speak? >> come on up. >> e i would like to wait, and

speak after. >> i will have the planning, department come up to speak right after. >> and okay. >> okay. >> thank you. >> kelley? >> good morning, chair yee and supervisors kelley, director of city wide planning from the san francisco planning department, and i am here actually representing, a whole group of city agencis which have been involved in speaking of the agencis that will rise and specifically responding to the grand jury report, and its recommendations. specifically today, i would like to respond to the two recommendations, and regarding the stake holder and engagement, in this issue, and in the recommendation of the numbers three, and which have to do with amending the city codes, and for the sea level rise, and i serve as the

co-chair, along with the deputy public works director, and of the mayor's coordinating committee on the sea level rise, and i also wanted to interview several people who are here representing the agencies that have been involved, both with that activity and in the work in thinking about and responding to the sea level rise, and those include, patrick, of the city's chief resilientcy officer who is here, and i think that he is actually the first in the nation and the officer, funded in part by the rockefeller foundation, and he has been very engaged inthies you, and we are one of the subcommittees of the mayor's committee. >> and also, with us is david, behar from the public utility's commission who chairs the technical committee, and the

sea level rise and who and the grand jury report is helpful in elevating the sea level rise, for the need for the city to be

aggressive about responding to that the sea level, strategy,

sometimes this fall and the committee is working on a lot of information gathering and a lot of the information and building blocks over this summer and early fall and we are bringing that forward and we will be happy to up date you, and supervisors and as those products and information becomes available. and coordinating, and we actually have the cross membership from all of the departments and including administrative people, as well as, technical people and a lot of work that is getting done there, and the group has divided its efforts into, about 6 components, and the first of which is an economic risk analysis, and sort of the cost and the cost of inaction and

the mayor is very interested in knowing that if we don't do anything or do do very much or deliberately and, what is the cost essentially and, is that work is being led by patrick, which is the officer, and we just came from a meeting just now, about that, and to take it from the sea rise level report and go into the next stage of vonnerbility and each of the capitol agencies and and we will have hard of the strategy and first a high level, assessment of the vonnerbility to the risks to the assessments

this fall, and there is a community engagement group once we have this information together what is our straggy for engaging the citizenry, and of the key stake holders, and from the business, and the community and so forth, and so that will be the product of this work as well, and it will be one thing to amend the recommendations for the building by building approach and probably the necessary approach is to look, sort of in the water front wide at larger solutions, that will protect the whole districts and that are vulnerable, and finally, there is a data analysis, group, a lot of this is really getting our arms around the existing conditions, and risks and vunerbilities and that requires a lot of data provisions and the data crunching and so there is a group that is particularly battled into that particular

task. and this will give us the basis, for saying, how best and most effectively to engage a broader group of stake holders, and and engage on that kind of collaborative effort and there is also a group supporting this which is the technical committee, and that was convened last year and developed, and the sea level guidance for the capitol plan, and that was chaired by david who is here today, and that, document, is now, serving as the guide, for the departments that come forward with the large capitol requests. and of the city. and the engagements that they are requesting. and the committee, and the oversight committee is essentially, making sure, that

that is the building assessments are actually, performed and that as part of the project process and i think that we have a have solid and internal structure and it is highly coordinating and the first thing that i will mention is of the new of the effort and the port and the planning department, are, and they are collaborating now on an approach to water front, planning, and that will place the sea level rise really in the center of that public engagement process and develop further policies, and design, and guidance. for the water front community. and the risk and taking advantage of the knowledge of some of the entitled developments that have been forward looking and planned for the sea level rise and plan for adaptation and assess what needs to be done and as part of that effort and i should mention that we are contemplating the process that will involve an informed and

science based design competition that will bring in experts much like with don in the new york new jersey area, following the hurricane sandy, at a process that was known by design and we actually engaged those parties and consultant to help us to create, and scope and build the process for san francisco, but perhaps, for adjoining communities to really, get creative about these solutions, and that was a highly successful process, in the new york, new jersey area, and we hope to duplicate that and now we have a new gauge to help us in scoping out that effort and so that is, our assurance that we are, taking seriously this recommendation three, and excuse me, 12 b and feel that we are implementing the recommendation, and with regard to the recommendation three, which has to do with the

amending building codes, to protect against the sea level rise and we are taking the spirit of that recommendation, and we do want to implement it in a different way than the strike recommendation and so formally, we are saying that that recommendation will not be implemented but we are implementing other measures and let me just quickly, describe those and the department of building inspections and chris from planning has been very involved in that approach, and which we feel is actually a better one, and that is that the city already regulates, the development and in the prone areas, and chris, can describe those regulations, and we have we have worked with fema and they are updating the innovation maps for the coast line and they will be subsequently updating the maps for the bay portions, and those essentially give us guidance for treating individual projects, in those four plans, and they have their own regulations and i think that i

have included there, and secondly, we have the sequa process where the sea level rises becomes the concern in the environmental review process that are subject to any substantial developments or in the flood plain and that is the second way in which we catch the current projects and the difficulty of amending our building codes, that as i said we have think are adequate for this and given the other processes is that they only look at individual buildings, and not access to the buildings, and of the states between the buildings, and in the the larger sort of district solutions that we are after and so we are saying, we may amend in the future but the process for now and the next year or so, we think fleet veered method, rather than doing the measure around the building at

the moment. we will be amending that structure as we go through this planning period over the next year or so. and we really feel that is the best investment of our time is actually the focus on the more integrated process which i have described. >> questions? >> i have a question, though? >> and this is and an important matter and so, and in the current issue, looking at, the future, and the processes is

described if, it is in the discussion for, and a while, i guess, and do you, do you have any, sense of some initial chances that you might be making with the code? not the comprehensive or anything, but, you know, and you, will be looking at code changes as ayou move along for the years and anything that you are anticipating in the near future. >> i guess that i would ask chris and bill to respond to that, and there are certainly some things that we could be looking at but we are just not, we feel that we have the productions in place, let me ask bill. >> and good morning, chris, with the planning department,

as mr. kelley mentioned one of the mayor's committees recently, enacted is the technical committee, which i serve on along with them along with all of the effected departments and the chaired by david of the sfpuc and we have the first meeting of that, and the technical committee recently. and the task committee that i serving on with a few others and tasked with developing recommendations for the coordination committee and for the mayor we have just begun that task and we have had one meeting so far and we have started to develop the ideas,

for the changes to address the sea level rise but it is just the beginning of that process and also as mr. kelley mentioned i think that the feeling is that through the review process, the city has sufficient tools to insure that the flooding risks associated with the sea level rise are adequately evaluated, and addressed and we have been using it for that purpose, and since, in and from what i seen back to 1990, through the mission bay regional, and the plan and more recently, with the treasure island and then of course for the projects that are along the vulnerable areas and our feeling is that while there is a very important

issue, we have the tools in place we will be developing td language and it will be recommended. >> thank you. >> and ma'am, would you like to come up? >> good morning, again, maria here from the civil grand jury, and regarding, thank you, regarding issues 12 b, please note that that, and the entire 12 section, regards, regional planning, where it will be representative of the city, toward regional planning around the area and i was surprised to learn this week that mountain view has committed to google to build a sea wall outside of the shores of mountain view to protect the new development to be paid for by a parcel tax,

levied on the citizens and kind of surprised me and i did not realize that we were that far along around the bay that is shows that we can in the waste any time, as far as talking with other comments around the bay and we need to have a good, strong regional representation there and probably through the aupysings of acds and we are going to end up with a hop scotch of situations all the way around the bay, but we need to be involve and i don't know who they were talking to but it sounds like it was a local decision that they made without the consideration of others, and regarding item three, on the code, and sequa is just fine with the jury, and we are happy with that as long as it is used and i have no idea that they are not, and the regulation is there, and if it is used fine. and the november, the 13th, 2013, the city contracted with the delivery special study on the mission bay which by the

way was a bay and it is now landfill, and that two year study will be due, november the 13th of this year, and hoping with all of the publicity and i have no idea where the city is on this at this point but the warrior's stadium and the giant's property, and at issue and that we at least wait for the results of that study, and i was pleased to learn, that they had hired a dutch engineer from holland to work with them on this and that will be very helpful i am sure in their determinations but they may have very helpful, suggestions for the city, as to what to do, or whatnot to do and it is not that we are adverse to any building on the property, but how we are going to build it and what we are going to do to mitigate the possibility and the strong of poet ten shall in a lot of area in that area, that is about it and thank you very much, and i want to thank the city, and yeah, i missed his name and it sounds like the city working hard on this issue, and i am it is very satisfying and a lot of the members of the community will be very happy to hear about

this. >> thank you. >> and when we, anticipating that this study will be completed, well november is up and, how long it takes to write the report i am not sure, it is after election day too, and so i don't know how that will work, but that is all that i know. >> okay. >> thank you. >> thank you. >> supervisor christensen? >> you want to take the public comment or should i? >> go ahead, and i can take a comment after public comment. >> okay. >> mr. kelley. >> i am just curious, in terms of this report, are you anticipating looking at it, and. >> yeah, we actually look at that as kind of an early test for many of these concepts that i was referring to that will be part of the larger adaptations of the work that we will be doing and we have been engaged

and looking forward to the report coming forward this fall and i did also want to respond as quickly to the other concern that was raised about the regional coordination we are in constant coordination with the commission and with the bcdc, and in fact, both of those, agencies as well as, spur, and others, are advisors to our local efforts and including, this, design, competition, and advisory group that i mentioned. and so, we feel that we are in touch, on the regional scale and what we are hearing is that they are very, much looking forward to san francisco taking some leadership here, and without really thinking about how not just building by building but the whole segment of the shore lines might actually be protected from the sea level rise and the kind of water front that the san franciscans want and it is enough for those that are the twin objective theres and i

feel confident that we are engaged with the regional, and going forward, and so i appreciate the comments about that. >> and okay. >> thank you. >> are there any public comments? >> come on up. >> you have three minutes. >> i work with the justice, and i have med with the bcdc with some of my others and we have talked about the sea level life, and the threats to coastal lines and we work to certain communities all the way around to the coast, but, where the things that we have and even here in san francisco, and tend to be overlooking, and i have to say that i like, i like a lot of the plans that are going off of the table, and there are at least, starting

the conversation, but no one has yet spun the conversation other than us, on what to do, with the toxic lands that surround our bay, and what to do with all of the landfilled and the cabing and hopefully you realize that when the sea level rises it is not going to go across the land it is going to go underneath there is no way set up as of yet to stop anything that is breaking down underneath those caps from rolling out into our bay, and hopefully you also understand that many of our residents in particular, in bay view, and richmond, and oakland, around the water front and down, and eldrol we fish and we eat it and a lot of the toxic from there is going to be and it already is, and it is

detrimental to our health and we need to start to address those issues now, before the water starts to roll in, and by the way, the water has already started to rise, and we are hopeful that you are going to, and insist on a more that you are looking forward to and for that engagement and bcdc and the other communities will have allow an opportunity to voice their -- any other comments? >> seeing none and i am grateful, and this is an opportunity to focus on the important topic for the city that is surrounded on three sites of water and with a lot of fill on the north and east sides and this is obviously something that we need to address and i am, hardened that

both our public institutions and many private institutions are looking at this issue, and i think that it is good not only for those in city government to focus on it but also to make our citizens more aware, of what the city is, and can be doing about this. and i think this is worse than left over previously than seeking to address and the investigations that my office has done, have indicated that there are many efforts under way, many of which are much insync with the recommendations but that this additional layer could potentially be duplicate or redundant and the fact that we have an office of resil ans makes me proud andvy been pleased with the information that we have gotten from that

group, and i am and both to be able to the sea level rise and also to previed a water front that is useful and delightful for the residents and i think, and i have a long history with spur and i look forward to the results of the information that they are bringing, and i do think that two points of this speakers that they brought up is regional nature of this problem is an important one and we don't want to do one thing and have mountain view doing the other and hopefully between them and the abag i think that this is a topic that those of us involved in those organizations should attempt to underline for the groups so that we are taking a regional approach and the toxic issue is one, and that is an ongoing issue of the sea level rise and going to make it better, and it is something that we are already facing and i know,

programs but because i believe that there are solid efforts under way and that those are efforts are coordinated in a manner that is likely to provide the good result and that we can add and under score some of these additional issues through those existing programs, and processes, i would like to make a motion on number three, that it not be implemented because and the technical committee, is coordinating efforts in this direction, currently, and 12 b, not implemented because the mayor's office and city departments, have created the sea level, rise committee, and which will address this, and we will need to note the regional

nature. and to know that there are methods in place to take care of it. >> there is a motion that has been made. >> it is not the board's response and the board has already submitted its response formally, and this is the planning department's response and so i am not sure if it is appropriate. and so i just want to get clarification. >> and yeah, there are two, recommendations, that required further analysis, in the last time, that the committee took this on, and so, it is appropriate, to adopt a motion, along the lines of what supervisor christensen recommends. >> okay and that is basically from the board's recommendation. and >> that is right, it is the board and it will be the

board's response of course, the mayor and the executive departments will continue to do it and they will do it and this is the response to the civil grand jury report and last but not least, because it is a hearing, we will just go back to the board for a revised approval? >> and every once in a while, a motion or a resolution, can be generated in the committee, and that is what this is, and so this is a hearing out of this hearing, the committee will generate a motion, which you will send to the full board for its consideration. >> okay. >> and supervisor christensen? can you please repeat what you are requesting so that i can make sure that i am on the same page. >> so we have -- recommendations, from the grand jury, and one concerning the amending of the building code and one concerning the creation of a local working group. and my motion is that since both of those recommendations