with the next board. >> so my other hesitation is that we do have a new board that is starting on january 8th. they will really be overseeing the actual implementation of the total policy. it just continues to feel early for me for us to adopt a policy today. especially when there are a number of unknowns around the budget, and also around, again, just the general mobility. when do residents go on and off the island? windy visitors come come on and off the island? what do our small businesses depend on? i have a lot less concerned about the weekend tolling, for example. i do get we have a lot of athletic teams and a lot of tourists. i have less questions there. i just really want to understand the monday through friday management, and again, what is the expected expense. what are the sources of revenue, where does this tolling program

fit into that. is very helpful to hear that munimobile will continue to be subsidized in the same way that we subsidize other neighborhoods , and this is again , as was stated earlier, to help fund a.c. transit ferry and the on island shuttle service that is a helpful distinction, actually. it is true, we do not provide other neighborhoods with that type of service. that gives me a little bit more comfort. i really do want to understand the free meaning for youth and against the discount program for our households where $75 feels like a lot. for example, for folks from paycheck to paycheck and may not be able to afford -- >> i don't mean to interrupt. >> the idea is to pioneering the idea of the accumulator pass, which you've also her discussion of it. >> the idea is not to require

anyone have the upfront pass costs on the first day and purchase it over time with each ride, up to the cost of the pass itself. so that way we can spread out that cost. >> that would be great. >> i am going to defer this decision to the president who represents treasure island. whether we weighed to make a decision, but i have to complement the staff on this. because as much as we don't -- there are some unknowns, i am complaining on the other end for my district. where is the transit coming? this can be built. let's not wait for the 25,000 more people and make a decision. in that regard, there some room

for me to defer the decision to the rep to that district. >> thank you so much. >> i agree. i also want to complement commissioner kim. i have been sitting with you for the two years that i have been on the board of supervisors and your thoughtfulness and your engagement on behalf of the residence that you represent is really impressive. and your care for them and your advocacy for them is something i just wanted to commend you on. thank you for that. and of course, i will defer to what you think is best. but i also want to appreciate this dialogue. i think that the place -- every time you present on this topic,

which is very complicated and a really hard new program to implement when is the first of its kind, and not happening anywhere else in san francisco. it feels like you move closer to something that everybody can live with and having finally taken my first trip to treasure island, thanks to the t.a. staff , and having a dutch arrived on ferry and seeing how quick that can happen, if done right, it really is a very exciting new transportation option for the island. i believe once it is implemented , it will be widely used and very -- in a very efficient way of getting to and from the mainland. but i just really think this is the best of government when you have a highly competent staff that is really thoughtful about the way you've been working on this project, and a very engaged

and effective advocate on behalf of the constituents. i have been a spectator watching it go back and forth but i want to complement you all on this process. >> i should thank you for being a part of this committee. it is not -- it is a micro- topic within our overall transportation system. thank you for spending a lot of time. i do have to say, when i was reading through all the material last night, i did think, it must be so much fun to work for the transportation authority. as much as i am being critical of the program, it is a lot of fun to imagine a different way of moving around the city and to develop new islands that will have 20,000 residents, and to think about what mobility looks like into the future. so as much as i brought up a lot of these concerns, i do think that it's a lot of -- i hate to use a word fun, but it is very

adventurous to brainstorm and be creative about ways of ensuring that people are able to move on and off the island and raise the revenue to pay for those systems it is incredibly exciting. i'm glad that this has been an incubator space for us to explore these different ideas. i know treasure island will pilot many of these concepts, and it can spread across san francisco and to other parts of the country. that is all incredibly exciting. thank you, again, commissioner ghee and commissioner ronen. i do want to open up for public comment so we can take that opportunity to hear from the public first before we continue this conversation. i do have two speaker cards. base on the case, and ariel fletcher. any member of the public would like to speak on this item, please approach the microphone now. >> thank you, supervisors. this is my first time coming before this commission. it probably will not be the last

my primary objective today and in going forward, i would like to commend them. i'm also concerned about five years, my presentation will be about this period you're talking about 20,000 residents. i am also going to talk to the commissioner and i respect you for all that. her and i are black. you can't change that. we go to sleep, we wake up, we are black. i am talking about the situation of the population of the city by the bay. we will not be nowhere around. we as black individuals are not african-american. i'm black american. i didn't try to emigrate into this country. we were brought here on slave ships and broke up with families all over this country. my last name is washington. i do believe george washington is my great grandfather and shall not tell a lie.

from here on out, the city by the bay, we are in a state of emergency. my children, my grandchildren, and my great-grandchildren are in a state of emergency. all these plans always billions of dollars that you are planning for the city by the bay, we will not be involved. commissioner, i expect -- i respect what you are doing, what you know as well as i know, and the mayor knows, she was on that committee of migration. i am so happy now because i elected governor -- i elected governor newsome. i am the only one in the city, the media that has every meeting they had. by the way, i don't have time to talk right now, me you go ahead and do what you want to do. i want numbers from everybody. we are in a state of emergency. the black folks, brown folks, and everyone who is indigenous in the city by the bay.

all these plans. >> good morning. my name is ariel and i am a transportation policy associate. we support the toll for treasure island pick really appreciate the issues and concerns about the rollout and the impacts of current residents that were discussed today. we think it's important to commit to solving these so development can go forward. tolling will be essential to ensuring people don't sit in traffic, contributing to economic loss for the region and in the climate. the proposed tolling and driving

over taking transit, putting us in the wrong direction in terms of meeting the goals for the program. we encourage you to implement dynamic pricing. we appreciate that the total hours match those of the bay bridge. this is important for legibility but why adopt the policies of the past, tolling rates at inflexible time thresholds. this is an opportunity to look forward. we agree there must be measures in place to ensure that access to and from the island remains affordable for existing residents and buildings and businesses. while there are good reasons to provide a stipend, we need a resolution that is more transit focused. they are derived from transportation see. we think it should contribute to the island share goals and current just encourage transit use. we should subsidize the behavior we are trying to support. we think it will be more advantageous to provide a transit pass for free in a

chopped or smaller cash subsidy. transit holders are more likely to use transit for all kinds of trips. a pass is a really important achievement to support the neighborhoods. we thank you for the opportunity to comment, and we appreciate all the hard work that has gone into developing the program to date. >> thank you. >> thank you. i am one of the businesses on treasure island. i am the owner and founder of treasure island winds. i started at 11 and 12 years ago briefly, i want to characterize the feedback we have given to the s.f. c.t.a. and the board that happened recently. from the business community that we are categorically against this for a couple of reasons. one is i have already had feedback from customers and my employees saying if there is a toll, they will not work on treasure island. specifically, vendors are already pushing back and i'm getting questions already about

is the toll already there, i'm already getting impacted just from the press reports. i think to your port does your point, a great point. i can speak for a lot of the businesses out there that the toll is a regressive tax on the existing residents and businesses for services that are there only to mitigate a problem that won't be for 5-10 years. we would more than happily pay something and contribute to the transportation cost. we want to make sure that those transportations are at cost and that we will be getting the service that promotes our businesses, helps the residence, and also builds a the businesses going forward. the proposed toll, right now as i see it, and looking forward for your development plans for

the mixed use of the commercial use of treasure island, would be very difficult. i can't see a lot of businesses that will be going out to treasure island if they have a specific toll that will prevent customers, vendors, and employees from being -- from coming out there peerk we want to be part of the solution, with the question is, there seems to be a quick rush to make this proposal before we actually really have a significant input into it. a final note, the first couple meetings that we had with over 60 people, businesses, we had four days notice before that meeting happened. four days notice. i want to thank you for the opportunity to speak. i would love supervisor can for you to come out and talk to mark the businesses out there directly. thank you. >> a quick question to you back when do most of your customers come visit? >> i have two different sets of customers. i'm a production winery. we have customers that come out -- customers that are production commercial customers and they come up during the week primarily off peak because they are trying to avoid the traffic

just like i do. i timeshift when i work out on treasure island. by retail customers however are primarily 10-5:00 pm on the weekends picked by the way, i want to make a point. my customer base is 95% local. east bay, north bay, san francisco, i have a few tourists bet the tourists are just beginning to come out there and getting to know that. having that burden on tourists itself is great. i understand we need to get the revenue from but primarily, when i'm getting feedback from a lot of customers, and i have one club customers that are regular customers, they are primarily from east bay. if there is a toll, i will probably lose a good proportion of those customers because it is an added expense. they like the convenience. they like what we are doing out there, but the reality is i could see the same thing goes for the restaurants and other customer facing businesses that are on treasure island today. >> thank you.

either any other members of the public would like to speak at this time? director, you are welcome to speak at any time. >> good morning, supervisors. i would be remiss if i don't come up here today just to pass some comments. so one of the directors so far, treasure island, let me tell you here that in addition to all of the public comments and meetings that sfcta have engaged in, you should know that for the last two years, the board has embarked on a very comprehensive meetings they the public are raising all the questions that you have been raising today. at issue here, we need to have a take away from all of the

discussion is that in 2008 is one the state legislature enacted what we are now discussing here and you are taking all this time to put these together. as you know, you managed to pass all the milestones of the development for treasure island. they are planning -- that could take decades. we have gone to court and now we are beginning the infrastructure in order for us to develop this massive project. we have to start from the infrastructure. back to the cult told. one of the reasons that we cannot weight until we have 25,000 people there, is that this is the only project and the only neighborhood in san francisco for the first time. it will be served by ferry. we are actually subsidizing that we are also subsidizing m.c. transit and munimobile. i hope i can have some more time here. i think the board of questions that we need to really

concentrate on here, and it is what supervisor he was alluding to, so wet after the five years? what i'm proposing, and i think we need to begin a very comprehensive -- we are actually doing original transportation. in the region, all the decades, they have talked about regional transportation. it has never been enacted. sfcta, we are really proud of them. you have an agency and a leadership position for us to begin a very comprehensive transportation of discussion for the region. this is what the treasure island project represents. everything should be subsidized with major transportation in munimobile. i know supervisor kim will be leaving soon. you need to begin now. how do we deal with this?

let's look at additional sources of funding. after 2021, where do we start? we have made it clear that i am concerned about the low income, i am concerned about the disabled, i'm concerned about youth and i'm concerned about small businesses. what we have is the sfcta staff as the finest of the country. residents are coming in. they need to be served by ferry. they need to have a.c. transit in place, and they also need to have the on island shuttle. yes, they are the first. we must provide for them even on the onset.

i foresee that supervisor yee and supervisor ronen, that you will have a bond measure at some point to look at transportation for the longevity for treasure island. it is a public private participation. they are putting in 30 million. the resident of treasure island is also a resident of san francisco. in order for us to help the small businesses, in order for us to make treasure island a destination, one of the finest projects in the country, we have to think outside the box, and we have to begin to rally the region and oakland. what about this? white to upload the traffic on the bay bridge? why can't we have ferry services bringing people from here and stopping at treasure island and going to alameda? from their -- there are many creative ways that we can help

right now. and sfcta as the agency that can help us to lead there peerk we would depart to you, supervisors , and we are part of the discussion. we must start because 2021 is right at the corner. we have the set of the residents coming in and we need to make sure that treasure island is welcome to them. in the interim, let's continue this conversation for the first time. looking at the comprehensive comic -- confrontation and making sure we have improved munimobile service. i think we all work together and we can head to the region and help m.t.c. we can help everyone for the first time in the history of this region, help to put in place a very comprehensive transportation system that will benefit all of the regions. thank you so much for your time.

>> thank you. is there any other members of the public that would like to speak what if not cacti --dash public comment is closed on this item. i just want to appreciate the conversation with commissioner staff and members of the public, after thinking about it, i'm really happy we had a public discourse. i want to move forward with what i would feel comfortable with supporting today, understanding a lot more studies will happen and a lot more unknowns will get answered over the course of 2019 to refine the program. what i would feel comfortable moving forward as our program total policy is to move forward with the proposed additional toll policies which is the hours and the total amount. i would like to make off-peak zero dollars, but move forward with 350 at peak at two dollars -- and two dollars that weekend.

with further studies, this may change. as a baseline, this is how i'd like to support the total program. to move forward with the affordability program recommendations, and maybe perhaps add in a note we will be studying the accumulator transit pass to ensure that low-income residents have a way to pay for their pass over the course of the month. i feel comfortable with $300 stipend. i calculated it. if you go on and off the island every day, it is roughly $168 and 300 seems to be a comfortable subsidy to ensure mobility for current active leaseholders as of 2018 to receive this $300 stipend. under the transit pass program recommendations, i would just like to add in the free munimobile for youth, and a study on free ferry for low income youth as well. and so i would feel comfortable moving forward and approving

this policy understanding again that over the course of the next two years, they there would be changes and refinements as we continue to understand revenue and what the expenses of the program are. i don't know if there's an idea to put this into the program that we passed, but a study of a.c. transit and whether they were both -- there will be usage at an hour or a 60 minute headway. a survey of what both residents and tourists and visitors and clients who move on and off the island and further study with businesses. particularly for employees. i think that to the point that was made by members of the public, there will be a toll on the weekend. that is going to be in place. i know that visitors go to napa, they go to sonoma, we all pay tolls on a bridge to visit those places on the weekend. i am not as put off by that revenue generation at that point

so that is what i would feel comfortable moving forward with. director chiang, you had stated that staff would draft a resolution asking the city to evaluate revenue options, and budget contributions to transit and affordability programs for treasure island residents. if we can move forward with drafting that resolution, i would feel comfortable approving the policy as is. i don't know if you have anything to add, commissioners. commissioner yee? >> would you consider including staff to study an extension of the beyond five years? >> i'm so sorry. i meant to include that. commissioner yee suggested we study beyond five years. the transit pass options for existing 2018 leaseholders. i think that that is a comfortable base for us to move forward with studying the budget

and spend the next supervisor on the board will really get to refine the program and make sure that it works. on a side parking lot, i really hope that we are able to move forward with the downtown congestion plan so that all of our residents are helping to raise revenue to pay for other transit modes, and we really have to reduce -- and i strongly believe this is why i am moving forward with this today, we have to reduce vehicle miles travelled in our city and we have to get people out of their cars. all of this growth is going to work for our city. so that is the motion that i would like to make to the recommended approval of the transit pass total toll policy and affordability program. any questions from commissioners or staff? okay. can i make a motion to adopt the amended language into the

program? and we can do that without objection. can be take a roll call on the approval of the program? >> on item three pack [roll call] >> we have first approval. >> could you please call the next item. >> internal accounting report for the three month ending september 30th, 2018. this is an information item. >> we have the deputy director of finance and administration presenting. >> thank you. this is the first report for the agency as of september 30th 2018. we have assets of approximately 1.2 million, liabilities of 257,000, revenues of 257,000, mainly coming from the several advanced transportation advantage and dish management technologies deployment grant and we have expenditures of

$214,000. during first quarter, we have not initiated major engineering activities yet due to a revised project law and state in the last presentation, to july 20th , 2021." anticipate starting these engineering costs in quarter three. we are definitely within budget at this point in time period do you have any questions, i am happy to answer them. >> we will now open up for public comment on item number 4. public comment is now closed. this item is an information item the committee does not need to take any action. mr clerk, can you call item five and six? >> introduction of new items. information item. item six is public comment. >> is her introduction of any new items costing none, we will move on to public comment for item number 5. and general public comment period are there any members of the public would like to speak? scene none, public comment is

now closed on items five and six before we adjourned our meeting, i want to recognize and thank the staff. i want to say that a lot of thought and creativity went into this process and i'm very excited about what will come forward to. i want to recognize the entire team at the treasure island mobility management agency, and also want to thank our commissioners for dedicating so much time to district six. it is incredibly appreciated. can you please call the seventh item? >> item seven is adjournment. >> item seven is adjournment. meeting is adjourned.

to begin. good morning. today is wednesday, october 17th, 2018. this is the regular meeting of the building inspection commission. i would like to remind everyone to please turn off all electronic devices and the first item is roll call. president mccarthy. >> here. >> clerk: vice president walker. >> here. >> clerk: commissioner konstin. >> here. >> clerk: commissioner lee. >> here. >> clerk: commissioner warshell. >> here. >> clerk: we have a quorum.

next item is item 2, president's announcements. >> president mccarthy: good morning, and welcome to the october 17, 2018 commission. as most note today is the 29th anniversary of the 1989 earthquake and i would like to ask for a moment of silence in honor of those who died or were injured by that disaster. [moment of silence] thank you. engineers and all of the rest of us do learn from each other and every earthquake and we're better prepared today to respond to the next major earthquake. we also know, however, that we still have lots of work to do to improve the city's resilience, excuse me and our overall ability to respond and recover, including never-ending training by both the private and the

public sectors so that we can be ready and better preparations such as success to grab and go bags. to help us to manage our own for the initial 72 hours. and we are better prepared mentally and emotionally to resist panic and fear as the ground shakes and rolls. and to be able to think clearly and to practice training we have to do. it's all -- it's a tall order and, make no mistake, and one that reminds us to keep working on -- with our families and loved ones every day to get prepared. and related to the ongoing observance of the 1989 earthquake, i want to let you know that one of the departments contracted non-profits c.y.c., is hosting 11:00 a.m. to 2:00 p.m. today another fire safety and emergency preparation fair

at 290 irving street the they'll hand out information on the material to help people to prepare to respond effectively and quickly to the next disaster. and they will do hands on c.p.r. demonstrations on-site as well. and they will also give away free smoke alarms while the supplies last. i also want to recognize director hui and the staff who took tours on october 4th of the modular housing factories. a tour that commissioner walker and i took in mid-december. i'll ask commissioner lee and warshell to have looks at the way to address the housing production and challenges. thanks goes out to commissioner konstin, and the director hui and director lowry who had a letter of appreciation for the reference in guiding the company through their permit process. and finally our employee recognition committee received

11 nominations for employee of the quarter, quarter two and three and selected mark langan as our winner for quarter two. mark was singled out for his impressive performance in terms of responding quickly and efficiently to often complex computer-based research requests. mark is particularly good with customer services and able to make tough calls with plants and with respect to the working collaborative with the entire m.i.s. team. so congratulations, mark, and thank you for all of your outstanding performance during quarter two. and our quarter three winner, bern net perez, a senior clo clk was nominated by four members of the housing staff. she's had persistence and professionalism as he during quarter three when the housing division was going through

transitions with new staff and new leadership. and we -- with more than 30 years experience besh get has a steady hand and very well informed mind and she shows dedication and exceptional skillsets in assisting problem solving. so congratulations, bernadette, and thank you for providing a brilliant role model for the staff to learn from and to -- and to become. present -- i think we will do the presentation. so commissioner lee will take care of that. so we have two -- >> clerk: the staff can come forward, the staff and the recipient. >> president mccarthy: lily, you're taking pictures? good, all right.

>> (indiscernible). [applause] >> congratulations. you can make comments if you like. >> thank you to all of our commissioners and staff and we will continue to support everything that goes forward. >> thank you.

[applause] >> i would like to express my deep appreciation to the staff and the commissioners. they've been really good in dealing with the transition. i'm thankful for your patience. once again thank you. >> thank you very much. congratulations. [applause] >> bernadette and i met in 1993 and i had long hair back then. and she looks exactly the same way as she does now. she's incredible and hard working and very cheerful throughout the 28 years at d.b.i. she oversees a busy staff. her staff carries out the important measures that the inspectors have to use to get compliance on important cases. and her duties range from compiling statistics for this commission to collecting everyone's timesheet. she's the backbone of h.i.s. and she's the glue that holds us together. and she's one of the reasons that i applied to work here. so from everybody in housing inspection we'd like to say

congratulations, bernadette. [applause] >> president mccarthy: thank you, and congratulations to all recipients. madam secretary, that concludes my public announcements. >> clerk: any public comment on the president's announcement? seeing none, item three, general public comment. and there will be public comment on matters within the commission's jurisdiction that are not part of this agenda. >> good morning, my name is jerry gerantler. on august 30, 2018, the department of building inspection, deputy director gave an excellent presentation on residential demolitions. mr. o'reardon's presentation demonstrated the progress that the planning commission and the building inspection commission had made over the last nine months. it's important that the planning

department and the department of building inspection embrace this progress and support d.b.i.s and mr. oh o'reardon's position that it includes a demolition. you can't add a floor to a structure without removing existing supporting structure. all vertical additions should require a separate set of plans, showing what was demolished and what will be added. these plans will bring clarity for district building inspectors and planning department planners. building inspectors like planners are not structural engineers, and we have been assigning the responsibility to both groups that is unreasonable. i am asking the building inspection commission to support mr. o'reardon's proposal and to request to support the development of an implementation plan consistent with his proposal. thank you very much. >> president mccarthy: thank

you. next speaker, please. >> clerk: there's no additional public comment. so going to the next item. item 4, commissioner's questions and matters. fa, inquiries to staff. at this time commissioners may make inquiries to staff regarding various documents, policies, practices and procedures, which are of interest to the commission. >> president mccarthy: commissioner walker. >> vice-president walker: i wonder if we could put that item on the next agenda for the meeting and to have a presentation of the report. >> president mccarthy: so i think if we're talking about the same thing, we are waiting on some legislation to come from supervisor peskin's office. and the latest that i heard on that is that it was supposed to be introduced on tuesday. but, you know, some tweaks, some

more work has to be done. so my understanding, which i don't have 100% confirmation of, that it will now be reintroduced next tuesday. >> vice-president walker: so it would be assessed anyway? >> president mccarthy: so that rolls into mr. reardon's presentation and to your point, commissioner warshell said to me, that when we get this report that maybe we can calendar something around that. and it will have to go through a process of land-use planning, so we'll have opportunity, but the big one i guess is to have the joint meeting when everything is finalized on this piece of legislation with planning and we can go forward there. so that hopefully is the way that it will play out. >> vice-president walker: so it wouldn't be at the next meeting but it might be -- >> president mccarthy: yeah, but we definitely could get an update on what was introduced by supervisor -- >> vice-president walker: i think that is a good idea so we're aware of what is coming even if it's not the official review of it.

>> president mccarthy: definitely. we could have our own input on that. >> vice-president walker: thank you. >> supervisor yee: future meetings and agendas. at this time the commission may discuss and take action to set the date of a special meeting and/or determine those items that could be placed on the agenda of the next meeting and other future meetings of the building inspection commission. our next meeting is november 21st. >> president mccarthy: so on that i got emails because it's thanksgiving, correct? the next day. so my decision was to keep the meet asking keep it short and i know that people will be leaving time. i hope that we have quorum. i know that commissioner konstin, you won't be here, right? but if it's okay with everybody i will just -- we'll keep that date unless there's objections. seeing none. >> clerk: thank you. any public comment on item 4a and b? seeing none, we'll move on to

item 5. discussion and possible action to make recommendations with current memberships and tomorrows to expire november 1, 2021, and november 1, 2022. >> president mccarthy: so commissioner lee or warshell, who will give the update on that? commissioner lee, you're ready. >> commissioner lee: commissioner moss and commissioner warshell and i met -- what was that, last week? and the nomination committee and we reviewed the current members of the access appeal commission and decided to reappoint all four members who had seats expired or will be expiring this year back on to the commission. and that would be commissioner.r walter park, and learner, and alice brown, and william

scott-ellsworth. >> i believe that some of our members may be here. >> commissioner lee: i think that we need to recommend that the full board approve as well. so i make a motion that b.i.k. appoint these members back on the commission. >> second. cb.>> clerk: are all commissioners in favor? any opposed? and congratulations, the members will be reappointed. if you're present and would like to come forward. >> i would like to thank you all for the service that you provide to our city. this is a really important function in making sure that we have access to buildings and we can do it in a way that makes it possible. so the work that you do is

really appreciated by all of us. i don't mean to speak for the commission. but maybe i do. so thank you again for serving. >> clerk: i have to take public comment. public comment on this item? seeing none. okay. >> president mccarthy: commissioner moss and commissioner warshell and three members. commissioner park is not here with us today.

>> (indiscernible).

>> i william scott ellsworth... (indiscernible).

>> president mccarthy: thank you, candidates. if you would like to say a few words you're more than welcome. >> thank you all for your confidence in us. >> president mccarthy: not at all. thank you. >> thank you. thank you. >> clerk: congratulations, everyone. we're on to the next item, possible action regarding ab-082, and administrative bulletin presenting guidelines and procedures for structural, geotechnical and seismic hazard engineering design review of buildings and other structures. >> president mccarthy: deputy director. >> good morning, commissioners. deputy director of permit services. i'm here to speak about the administration bulletin with the guidelines and the procedures for structural, geotechnical and

seismic hard ard engineering design review. and this bulletin addresses structural and geotechnical and seismic hazard naturalling with buildings and other structures. and wherealterations, and it may apply to the prescriptive provisions of the san francisco building code. and for the projects with the prescriptive exemptions of the building code. and the discretion of the director of it may include one or more, structural engineering, geotechnical engineering, site specific seismic assessments, and scaling. the term geotechnical and seismic hazard engineering design review is referred to as a peer review. and it encompasses design review as required. if the director determines that

the review is required they may request geotechnical or seismic hazard reviewers having knowledge and experience to provide professional opinions on the design aspects of a project. the purpose is to have an independent objective technical review of the aspects of the project design that are identified in the scope of the review. reviews contract with san francisco department of building inspections are responsible to the director. and they are responsible for the payment of fees and other expenses for professional services of the reviewers. and they shall sign all written communication to the director. this is a new process by d.b.i. sf-dbi new process retains the reviewer's responsibility to the director in align with the number of jurisdictions that the contractor -- that the contract

directly with reviewers attach the clause for the project sponsor. previously the city of san francisco procedures for procurement of professional service have not been suited to directly contracting with consulting engineers. and reviewers instead contracted with the project sponsor. the revie rears are, nonetheles, responsible and under the directions of the director. so the change to this is that we contract directly through the peer review group down. the engineers -- the engineer records is solely responsible for the construction contract documents. documents in the reviewer will be retained as part of the fdbi files. each reviewer is selected by the director based on the reviewer's qualifications applicable to the project and considering the availability with the project scale. the director may at his or her discretion consult with the

project sponsor and the engineer of record and others before selecting the reviewers. the reviewer shall disclose to the director in writing any potential conflict of interest related to the project and the desired scope of review. or the ability of the reviewer to be independent in other objectives in the review. each reviewer provides professional engineering services shall be a registered professional, holding a professional license in accordance with the california law. qualifying staff and reviewing not registered as a p.e., including reviews from academia, can contribute to the review under the responsibility charge of the registered engineers. reviewers should be engaged as early in the design process as practical. and this design team has an

opportunity to look at the disciple decisions that could disrupt the design development if addressed later in the design phase. early in the process the initial of record, and a representative of the director and the reviewers should convene a meeting to establish the scope of the review. and the methods, the lines of communication, the timing of the review milestones and the degree to which the engineers of record anticipates the designs will be developed for each milestone. and at the conclusion of the review and sequestered by the director the reviewers shall submit to the director a report documenting the scope of the review and the comment logs and the professional opinions of the reviewers regarding the design performance and the criteria identified in the scope of the review. so this has been a long process on this and it's still in draft form but it's tasked by con and under the city attorney's review

right now. and san francisco d.b.i. just added to this ordinance all projects of new buildings 240 feet or taller located in the city's office.

>> he has been working on this for years, if you have any questions. >> i have a few quick questions on projects. we don't have the data, that is fine. obviously, we had last week where we had fleet week and i had the privilege and honour to go and talk at fleet week where we had a building and safety strategy program. you were there and i appreciate it. i thought it was interesting the level of conversation as to the different changes that are coming down the pipeline. well if you think, as a city, we

are based on your years and years of constantly evolving on this, where do you think we are compared to other cities and how far are we advanced in this arena right now, as best we can be? >> we are at a point that this is the ten year anniversary of this administrative bulletin. the first was developed ten years ago. requiring more scrutiny by the engineer professionals and more. right now we are at the point where we expand from the structure.

we have more scrutiny on the geotech issue. >> in that arena, compared to other cities, are we exploring the geotechnical side of things? do we want to break it down more than l.a. or are our requirements more stringent than others? >> much, much more stringent. we already have the slope protection act and we require further reveal and detail resign -- design review as required. >> and the industry as a whole, how are they responding to these extra measures that we are taking, particularly in tall buildings? for example, is a lot of projects -- are they going to bed rock or are they taking a look at different -- what is it

doing to the industry? have we had many projects lately that falls under these new criteria even though they are not necessarily implemented yet, legally? >> actually, we are still implementing the old one. that was already updated two years ago by a minor change with a peer review. >> we were paid by the director of the city. we have more control of the third-party review. >> ok. all right. >> and when we are further -- to geotech engineers require a new tall building -- >> president mccarthy: right. >> we encourage people to drive the pile