both some people don't like it and some people do we're concerned about that. >> it's about thirty something out there that's risky. you know, disliked by someone torn apart and that's the whole point of what we're drying to do >> you never take this for granted you make sure it is the best if you can. >> ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪

>> good moning today is wednesday november 16, 2016. please turn off all electronic devices. the first item is roll call. >> mccarthy, here. clinch, here. gilman, here. konstin, here. lee, here. walker, here. warshell, here. we have a quorum and the next item is item 2, presidents announcements. jrkts good morning and welcome to the november 16, 2016 bit meeting. because of the-i want to read a few long detailed information into the record here on behalf of the president announcement. because of the unusual circumstances presented by the millennium tower situation the

department works with the mayors office city administrator and board of supervisor tooz take step tooz improve department policies, processes and procedures to provide additional scrutiny when reviewing high rise construction of 2 40 feet or more especially when located in the seismically vulnerable neighborhoods. that is why director hui announced last month effective immediately the department will select all fuper peer review participants. those outside experts dbi calls for reviewing 240 feet or higher and building design is performanced based rather than previous practice participated in the peer ruview selection process. in addition, per my

more recent discussions with director hui and also with effect v immediately the director will work with staff in key areas of building code compliance to develop request for qualification for professional and academic experts to advise department in tall building design review. the new rsq process will create a dbi pool of skill sets that may need to be be a part of department review of tall building projects 240 feet tall. the department will pay the participating experts for review services as needed basis to support the department staff in analyzing designs where the department lacks such expertise or the comp plex modeling required to verify the building performance. the pool of

experts may supplement or replace the existing peer review process as the department would have its own qualified experts to assess independently the design performance modeling and other information the project sponsor submit as part of building permit review process. such a project in a area with size class f or the [inaudible] in a high risk seismic zone and subject to liqueication, project requires one or more engineer for expert panel review. additional experts in specializing fields also may be identified for specific project if the director determines that to be necessary. with that, congratulations to director hui for the holding his 4th annual states of department all dbi and planning meeting auth 24. at the meeting attending my

most department 280 employees, i stress 280, director hui stated priorities to continue the memorandum to to construct more housing unit. strengthsen the seismic safety through ongoing implementitation of the soft story ret row fit program. expand education and communalty outreach to insure more san franciscans are prepared and know what to do to protect themselves and families when the next big one strikes. and continue to deliver better and better customer services in the department ongoing teerft review plans, issue permits and inspect work to insure structureerize code compliant and to pursue code enforcement to insure improved building safety for everybody and all san franciscansism we also want to absolute dbi technical service staff, particularly kirk means and david leon and deputy city attorney judy [inaudible] for steadfast efforts to keep the very

difficult code cycle on schedule. this code updates occur every three years and critical to building safety and require a lot of work from staff and department code advasery committee. the board of supervisor jz now-they have now approved the code updates insureing we are ready to go again january 1, twnt 17 so well done there. finally, we want to welcome katie [inaudible] >> sureping. >> a new small business acceleration business program to 1660 mission street where she is assisting small business, narfbigate the permit review and approval process. strongly supported by the mayor offense office of economic and workforce development and katy tang the focus is on small

businesses who want to start restaurant. dbi looks forward work wg her and all small business owners to make this program a success. that concludes my announcements. >> thank you. is there public comment on the president announcement? seeing none, itedm 3, general public comment. bic will take public comments on matters within the jurisdiction not part of this agenda. seeing none, item 4, election of the bic vise president. >> obviously the seat was vacated by the mubing of commissioner melgar to the planning commission, where she works for a living and have the vice chair. with that and ask for commissioners who would have a nominee, please.

we have commissioner konstin, commissioner walker. second by commissioner lee. is there any other nominees? seeing none, can we call? >> so, the motion was set by commissioner konstin and seconded by commissioner lee to elect commissioner walker as vice president. is there public comment on the motion? seeing none, i'll do roll call vote. mccarthy, yes. clinch, yes. gilman, yes. konstin, yes. lee, yes. walker, yes.

warshell, yes. thank you, motion carries unanimously. congratulations vice president walker. [clapping] >> were you ever vice president before? >> i was many many years ago. >> were you president before? >> ya >> how many year ago was that? the moral of the story is stick around long enough. >> thank you very much commissioners. honored to serve as the vice president. i'm honored to reptd our commission and staff so thank you very much and hope i do you proud. look forward serving with you. >> thank you. item 5, election of nomination subcommittee member. >> on that, i would call for

nominees on that. i think commissioner warshell would be a great feet. if i great fit on that. is there any other nomination from any other commissioners? seeing none, call the question. >> there is a motion by president mccarthy, seconded by vice president walker to nominate commissioner warshell for the nomination subcommittee member. is there public comment on this item? seeing none, roll call vote. mccarthy, yes. walker, aye. clinch, yes. gilman, yes. konstin, yes. lee, yes. warshell, yes. motion carries

unanimously. congratulations. >> thank you. >> [clapping] >> item number 6, commissioner question and matter. incommissioner may name inquiry to star for document policy practice and procedure of interest to the commission. >> seeing none. >> item b, future meetings and ajendsa. discuss and dake action to set a special meeting or discuss items placed on the agenda of building inspection commission. the next meeting is december 20, 2016. >> what date? >> december 20. >> i might not be available december 20 so don't know if there is anybody else missing on the 20th. >> i'll be in contact if you

like to keep that date or change it. >> okay. >> commissioners have any items to discuss regarding the upcoming agenda yod could e-mail my if you dont have anything at this time. is there public comment on item 6 a and b? seeing none, item 7. discussion on the accela permit project and tracking system. >> commissioners. sean bouleen with department of technology and hear normally henry presents and not available this morning so will present the update. um, i believe you have the write up delivered as part of the package and have it in

advance. let me go through the update. what we accomplished over the course of the last month we finished requirements reviews, detailed requirements review with assistance of gardener and we accela and 21 tech represented throughout dbi. they were detailed and very productive and i think very successful series of discussions and meetings. and also following those reviews we had written sign off fraup deputies through dbi and sign off from the project owner, ron tom. we got all the sign offs that we would like over the course of the last month and think we are very successful on that front as well. the next thing we are working on, the plan called for proof of concept to look at areas of

functionality in the gardener findings were read and needed attention. the proof of concept, we have been working othen plan what toprint and how toprint it and insure the solution can be sweet to meet our needs and that process is underway. expected to deliver the proof of concept to dbi over the next couple weeks. the last item i think is of high importance is the civil service process. of course to get funding to continue there is fairly long series of things that we have to do. we need board of supervisors approval before that we need cisc service approval, and union approval and have to give 60 days notice and so on. there is a little bit of the ankle bon is connected to the shinbone going on there. to

keep things moving we submitted that paperwork earlier this month to get it started while we are working on other things like more detailed plan and proof of concept and proof of concept plan as well so pushing on all fronts and parallel to make sure things move forward in timely a fashion as possible. there are other things we are working on as well. one is there governance model and do we structure it. low does the business participate and steering and decisions made from aerfblg from policy decisions to governance to differ cult design. there is governance model worked on as the currents effort and in review now and will gather input on the new guverance model as well. the big things coming up, proof of

concept and expect a detailed plan from the vendor for taking us to go live and review and vetting that plan. negotiation to make sure the plan is real and realistic and we are all in alignment and that's where we are at. there is a lot of progress made over the last couple months and we are right there in terms of these deliverables. any questions? >> commissioner walker. >> thank you for this. it looks like we are on schedule like milwaukee next menth to look at path forward? >> i actually don't know indetailed plan is ready before next months bid but should be close. >> okay. i am understanding that the head of department of

technology left the city, who interfaced with us about the project to give us assurance that we were moving forward and i also understand the leadership of accela changed. i wonder if you can tell us how that might effect what is happening or say it isn't going-we are still on a path. >> i think we are still moving forward on a proper path. i think thanks to miguel he was instrumental pointing thinshs in the right direction and dont see a significant risk posed by miguel leaving. we plan on get-there is interim cio assigned and getting the individual up to speed. i haven't met him myself but i

dont think there will be any risk posed by that turnover. the turnover within accela i think it has been aassureing and positive. ree reached out to ron tom and tom hui and said let's work together and very positive. >> our vendors are fully committed to the partnership. we had issues that led us here i think? >> yes >> okay, thaurng. >> anymore questions. seeing none, thank you for the update. >> any public comment on item 7? >> jerry gra dratler. i want to cu-mind the it department for putting in place the foundational documents that had been missing for the last 4

years and look forward to continuing progress. thank you. >> thank you. >> any additional public comment? seeing none, item 8, discussion and possible action regarding a modification to administrative bulletin ab-032, site permit processing to remove section regarding planning department routing. >> kirk means from department of building inspect spection technical service division and here to bring to you modification proposed to administrate a bulletin number 032. site permit processing. it is got a fairly long history with the department at least dates back to the mid-80's when san francisco adopted the california code. it is very unique. i know no other cities that have a site permit process, but it serves us well

in coordinating between planning and building. the changes proposed are fairly minor. we have done a update to get ready for the next code referencing the proper years codes and proper code sections. the biggest change was deleting a planning routing section that was in there and it doesn't change any of the existing processes, we just is a different document, g 20 which ask informational bulletin that describes all the routing between departments required by department of building inspection. that's pretty much the nuts and bolts. any questions i can answer? >> commissioner walker?

>> no--deputy director sweeney, if you have a second, please. just looking here trying to punch holes in this here and can't. basically this is-i will break it down. want to do a site permit. the old days i went to planning with that, right? >> you still do. >> still do. okay. >> site permit approved by planning and planning gives most-of your entitlements when the building department okays a site permit, there is normally no structural. there may be more-may not all mep's are in. if you do high rise your curtain wall isn't in. quite a few things left out. if you are doing larger projects. the

basis for a site permit is give the developer or home owner the option not to throw so much money up top in a process that isn't always crystal clear. planning can take half a floor away and tell you to set backs, there are a number of things that could come across with planning and this--so instead of having to go back to the structural engineer and mechanical engineer twice, you only do that once. i like to clarify one thing, the county of los angeles came up and look td at our site permit and have a version of it in los angeles now. >> we are clear there is no change to the site permit process? there is no-we are not going backwards we are just tightening up a process where

we are saying we don't have to go back and forth to structural engineer? >> the only thing you go back to planning is your first architectural adeneda has go back to planning. 6 months ago they wanted quite a few thing jz got backloaded and had discussion and they were happy snding anything back that is required. we have a information sheet kaul called g 20 and it is on paper and tells what goes where. >> the site permit would sit in line and wait for a look because planning had to sign off, right? >> most the work on the site permit does occur in planning. site permit designates how high the building is and long and use. when it come tooz building we are nuts and bolts. >> the upside here is exactly what? >> i'll have-them g 20

information sheet is continuously updated and modifyed every time a piece of legislation passes we have to route to the health department or not health department or back to planning two or three times, whatever it is, the legislation forces us to redirect things accord toog the legislation. those things have to happen on an effective date of the legislation so those are updated by various departments as they happen and we get the information out to the customer right away. >> my understanding is this is just getting rid of redundancy? >> that is what we are trying to get it spelled out like we are a 4 year old child.

it is streamlining this? >> yes. >> it isn't undoing any existing site permit policies? >> the silet permit policy and g 20 are like living documents. we change them as needed. for one of your projects you really control how your site permit will look. your adeneda process will look and that is most important thing is what happens after the site permit. >> so, somebody who is a very seasoned veteran like yourself, is there any uninteneded consequencess we are overlooking here? >> i'm all for streamlining >> none i can see. >> okay. thank you for that. >> a motion to approve? >> public comment >> public comment on this item ab 032? seeing none, is there a motion

to approve it? >> move to approve. >> a second? >> second. >> do roll call vote. mccarthy, yes. walker, yes. clinch, yes. gilman, yes. konstin, yes. lee, yes. warshell, yes. the motion carries unanimously. item 9, directors report. >> 9 a, update on dbi finances. >> good morning commissioners rchlt taurus madison deputy director for department of building inspection and before you is october 2016 financial

report. it provides data on expenditures and receive news from jm twnt 16 through october 2016 and i'll go over a few highlights. for revenues remain strong. we collected about $21 million in revenue and see that on page 1. page 2 you see that while revenues remain strong they are lower than they were compared to the same time last year and that is to be expected. last year in fiscal year 15-16 that was the highest collection in the department. overall, reserve news from last year to this year have gone down about $2.7 million. if you look at innext table it shows the number of issue permits and talked about this before and you can see that both evaluation has gone down about 37 percent and also we are also seeing fewer number of permits issued. if you look

that first table you see the largest decrease in the number of high value permits want down by about 19 percent. but overall revenues are still fine. we expect to meet our budget or exceed the revenue budget but just compare to last year you see things going down and anticipated that. on the expenditure side we can continue to increase compared to year over year. you will see we are about 8 percent this year and that is primarily because salaries have gone up more this year than last year and that is reflected in the last meeting of gearing up and hiring. so, overall if you look at the first page again, you see the projected revenue is at budget and the reezten is there is because it is too early to make real adjustments and so just projecting that budget but as we get to the 6 month mark we'll look at if we

see trends and information and try to make actual projections. i'll happy to answer question. >> seeing none. thank you. >> thank you. >> item 9, b, update on propoz said or recently enacted state or local legislation. >> good morning. bill strom, legislative and public affairs. i call attention to a few of the items that i submitted in your packet. the fire safety requirements that supervisor campos and others supported and took effect after labor day, we actually had a first working group meeting with some folks in the mayor's office about a week ago. essentially still working out data assistance with the fire department so we

can improve transparency and make it a bit easier for people to track these types of investigations following a fire and/or when citizens call to alert us to a possible fire hazard so that our cardination efforts are improved. i would say that is moving forward. we also have sfr visor farrell and peskin making adu city wide. you are probably aware the governor also signed just recently a state law that essentially facilitates and encourages owners to do adu's by waving the utility cost for connections. that does save substantial amounts of dollars so whether or not this actually leads to more adu permits,

we'll have to wait and see. as of right now dbi issued 29 of those permits, we had about 134 applications filed. there are still 116 of them under review at planning and another 17 under review at the fire department. so, we are trying to coordinate with planning to see what some of the review issues might be on adu. they continue to be a potential source for more affordable housing, but i would say the process is still relatively slow. i think mentioned earlier during the president announcement the triannual codes have been passed. the board passed that unanimously on consent yesterday. we made arrangements with the mayors office to try to obtain that signature soon in the next day

or two so will make our january 1 deadline and as thez president said we owe a lot of thanks to mr. means and the technical services staff who keep that on track. i guess the final thing i'll mention is i think i mentioned supervisor peskin proposed a tall building advisory committee and expect that to come to the land use committee and possibly also to the budget committee possibly around thanksgiving or immediately there after. there are responsibilities dbi will be involved in relative to that and working with the supervisor and mayor prfs office on those. with that, happy to take any questions. >> seeing none mr. strom thank you.

>> iletm 9 c, update on major projects. >> good morning commission. tom hui. as you can see compared to last month the [inaudible] go down by.77 percent. any question you have? >> item 9 d, update on code enforcement. >> good morning commissioners. deputy director inspection service. here to report the code enforcement and dbi update. building inspection performed for the mounth of oct, fiver 184. 1 err complaints 328. [inaudible] 284. complaint with first

notice of violation, 61. complate and abated without notice are 258. abated complaints are 27. second notice of violation refer to code enforcement were 6. hazard inspection service, performed with 1081. complaints received 341. complaint response 24 to 72 hours is 334. complaint with notice of violation 129. abated complaint of notice of violation are 266. [inaudible] 41. routine inspection, 352. code enforcement services number of cases sent to directors hearing is 54. number of order of abatement, 11. number of cases under advisement, 13. number of cases abated, 46. code

enforcement inspection, 210. number of cases referred to city attorney, 1. over to the right we have a total column we added to see the total for the year along with the graphs provided. thank you. >> thank you. >> any public comment on directors report item a through d? seeing none, item 10 review and approval of the minute of regular meeting of april 20, 2016. any discussion or a motion to approve? >> move to approve or second. >> second. >> there is a motion and second to approve the minutes. any public comment? seeing none, all commissioners in favor? >> aye. >> any opposed? the minutes are approved. on to item 11,

discussion and possible action on the annual performance evaluation for the director. 11 a, public comment on all matders per taining to closed session. is kna therepublic comment on the item? seeing none-- >> john [inaudible] city attorneys office. i just wonder for the convenience oof the commission in closed session since we there are two evaluations whether you want to call both items together so you don't have to come back into the public after the first one and return. >> dually noted. >> if no objections? >> i'll also will be address item 12 rsh discussion and action on the anual perfornlance evaluation of bic secretary. 12 a, all matters per taining to closed session.

any public comment? seeing none, we are addressing both item 11 and 12. 11 and 12 b possible action to convene a closed session. is there a motion to convene? >> move to convene in closed session for agenda items 11 and 12. >> second. >> there is a motion and a second. all commissioners in favor? >> aye. >> we are now in closed session. it hello, this is the building inspection commission. we are reconvening our session regarding ajendsa item 11 and 12. is there a motion to reconvene in open session to vote on whether to disclosez any or all

discussions held in closed session regarding 11 and 12? >> i move >> and second. >> there is motion and second and now in open session. >> thank you for the commissioners for very detailed discussion. regard to item 12, commission secretary and the big unanimously approve the performance evaluation for sonya harris who is our dedicated and long serving commission secretary. we congratulate and thank you for the job well done and look forward work wg in the future. >> thauchck. >> with regards to director, we accept the evaluation of 15 and 16s however we amend that will follow three priorities for 16 and 17. these evaluation will

highlight the three policies that we would like added to this memo that we will probably introduce in sometime around december. if i miss spoke please commissioners add. >> i want to emphasize that we moving forward we appreciate the extensiveness of the evaluation process the city and county of san francisco has you do and we do appreciate that, we will focus on 3 pritorties. they will be the most important looking at performance. we will issue that memo at december meeting. >> thank you. next item. >> next item is item 13, adjournment. is there a motion to adjourn? >> move to adjourn. >> second.

>> all in favor? >> aye. >> we are now adjourned it is 129 p.m. thank you. [meeting adjourned] light for o streets illuminating our ideas and values starting in 2016 the san francisco public utilities commission is xhoefl that light with new led with the did i audits for better light for streets and pedestrian and

they're even better for this vitally lasting longer and consuming up to 50 percent less energy upgrading takes thirty minutes remove the old street light and repeat 18 thousand 5 hundred times while our street lights will be improving the clean energy will remain the same every san francisco street light is powder by 100 percent godfathers hetch hetchy power in one simple word serious as day turns