>> remote hearings require everyone's attention and most of all your patience. if you're not speaking, please mute your microphone. to enable public participation, sfgov tv is broadcasting and streaming this hearing live. we will receive public comment on each item of the ginned. comments are available by calling 415-655-0001, enter access code that's on your

screen. when we reach the item you're interested in commenting on, press star 3 to enter the queue. each speaker will be allowed up to three minutes. when you have 30 seconds remaining, your time will be up. best practices are to call from a quiet location and mute the volume on your tv or computer. i'd like to take roll. [ roll call ] >> clerk: thank you, commissioners. first on your agenda is

consideration of items proposal for continuous. items (a) and (b). 6424 3rd street/188 key avenue - northeast intersection of 3rd street and key avenue, lot 002 of assessor's block 5470 (district 10) - request for conditional use authorization, pursuant to planning code sections 303 and 712 to demolish the existing one-story commercial building and allow new construction on a large lot (10,206-square-foot lot) within a nc-3 (neighborhood commercial, moderate scale) zoning district and 40-x height and bulk district. this action constitutes the approval action for the project for the purposes of ceqa, pursuant to san francisco administrative code section 31.04(h). newsletter under the calendar item 11.

there is a proposal for a continuance for several weeks to june 17. and item 12, 13, and finally under your discretionary review calendar item 16 at 140 through 142 there is a request for a discretionary review. we no other items for continuance. we will take public comment. public, press star 3 to be added to the queue. you will have three minutes. >> on 50 and 67 california

street i think it is vital that you do that because there are some very irregular issues here. for one thing there is the height map. now, i noticed that it said it was not consistent with the highlighting map, no. it was not just discovered this february. you know, i was informed about a proposal for going beyond the 65 at a meeting, i don't know at 2019. and i immediately called the planner who assured me that the entire district was for this length. a project has been issued for seven storeys or something like that within the 75 feet which at that time wasn't active or something like that. when the project was suddenly on

the agenda for 680 feet, i notified you of that fact and it was approved anyway. and then i went on for months trying to get before the appeal time ran out, by the way, i kept trying to get from your staff the maps. what are the maps? okay. and there i attempted to contact the board of supervisors. i was told don't e-mail, bring it in and then told i might be arrested for being on the street. when i mailed it, the board of supervisors didn't know what to do. for several maps i had been asking for the maps. i was planning to get them because they weren't forthcoming, when the maps came

last summer, they had been changed. i kept trying to find out what has happened here? where are the zoning maps that were passed unanimously by the board of supervisors and scott sanchez, i to -- >> clerk: thank you, ms. chapman, that is your time. >> i am here for the sponsor on 156 california street. we did not request a continuance. this matter was continued two weeks ago and is set for a continuance today, so i'm not sure how a continuance is being considered here. supervisor peskin requested one two weeks ago. the issue that ms. chapman

brings up is a mistake in the zoning. that is why today's hearing is being held to resolve that issue and the staff is prepared to resolve that. i don't see a need for a further continuance at this location and i ask that you not continue this matter and hear it today. >> clerk: commissioners, in case you have staff, i believe staff is online in case you have questions related to that continuance request. >> hello. i have a question about 6424 third street.

has it been continued? >> clerk: yes, that's being considered at the moment. the proposal is for it to be continued to may 13. >> am i able to make comments or questions? >> clerk: only on the matter of continuance. this is not a q&a period. >> i have e-mailed in my questions. i am a resident across the street. >> clerk: if you have no questions on the continuance, they will respond to your questions. members of the public, last call. you have two minutes.

>> my name is michael kohola and i'm a resident on wood street and i want to comment on the 2800 dairy boulevard that's asked for continuance today. i represent sort of a group of probably 15 or so adjacent households to the project and we are in support of the continuance which was june 17. the developer and the neighbors are working collaboratively on a variant design to the project and we would very much appreciate the continuance. thank you. >> clerk: commissioners, that concludes public comment on matters proposed to be continued and they are now before you.

as stated, mr. perry is on the line to respond to any questions on the california street continuance. >> i would like to have mr. perry explain to us what the issues are. >> yes, thank you, commissioner marr. good afternoon, commissioners. the issue with california is a ceqa related matter that was identified just prior to the hearing. the current ceqa document on the project contains a small piece of information that has changed sijsst since it was issued and would need to be updated so we cannot take action on the matter. staff is asking for a two-week continuance in order to address that matter.

>> clerk: thank you. commissioner imperial. >> move to continue all items as proposed. >> second. >> clerk: on that motion to continue items as proposed. [ roll call ]. >> clerk: that will motion passes unanimously placing this under your consent calendar, all matters under this calendar are considered to be acted on as routine. there will be no separate discussion of these items. the item can be removed from the consent calendar.

item 4, 2021-00485 cua and item 52021-000389 drp at collingwood street, a discretionary review. this is the chance to ask that these two items are pulled off. you need to press star 3 to enter the queue. seeing no members of the public requesting to speak, public comment is closed and your consent calendar is now before you. >> i would move the consent calendar as proposed. >> second. >> clerk: thank you, commissioners. on that motion to approve with

conditions items 4 and take the discretionary review as modified for item 5. [ roll call ] >> clerk: that motion passes unanimously 7-0. that places us on commission matters, item 6, consideration of adoption draft minutes for april 15, 2021. members of the public, this is your opportunity to speak to the minutes by pressing star 3 to be added to the queue. seeing no members of the public requesting to speak at this time, commissioners, public comment is closed and the matter is now before you. >> move to adopt the minutes.

>> second. >> clerk: on that motion. [ roll call ] >> clerk: that motion passes unanimously 7-0. item 7 commission comments and questions. >> this is a request to director hillis. in recent months we have had a number of questions before us regarding the amount of open space that is regarding those projects. it instruct me that it might be useful instead of just looking at those projects on a case-by-case basis to look at the overarching policies that are guiding some of our decisions as applied to these

projects. three issues in particular instruct me as warranting maybe some analysis to the commission. there may be others, but the three that jumped out for me are as follows. one, why do we have different open space standards for group housing versus residential? it seems like the standard for group housing is less of the amount per open space is less than residential and i'm wondering what the rationale is for that distinction and if it still makes sense, it's especially in light of the very large group housing projects we are seeing presented on the face of it. the density of those projects makes me question why they have a lower asked than the regular projects. covid has shown us how important

it is for access to open space. a number of us have been asking about open spaces. there is space for residents to have individual open spaces. we've been made aware that current standards for balconies require that they be quite large in order to count as open space and we've seen a desire on commissioners including myself so that balconies are large enough for one or two chairs so people can at least sit outside. i wonder if we can take a look at why it is that the standards discourage people from adding private balconies. it seems to me we are doing just the opposite. thirdly, and i'm not sure there is an answer to this but i'm

worrying about it a lot. is there a way for the city to look at its own regulations to preserve the argument that there is some bare minimum that needs to be provided? we've seen varying degrees for concession on open space and as we look into the future i think we will see a lot more state and city bonus projects. i'm not suggesting if we look at these issues and see that changes are warranted that we would apply toes changes to projects very far long in the process. but i think it's useful if you create a step back and take a look at the policy issues behind open spaces are warranted and

for those of us newer on the commission to understand why the rules are the way they are. >> i think we can schedule a discussion as this issue has come up by various commissioners. happy to schedule an informational item in the next couple of months to talk about it. >> thank you. that would be appreciated. >> i was just nodding along with everything said. i think so yesterday the city and county was at 69% so hopefully we're at 70% of residents who have their first vaccination, at least one vaccination shot. i'm so proud of our city. i know we have so much heartache

and so much pain in the pandemic. i would encourage anyone who hasn't been vaccinated to get vaccinated so we can hopefully get back to something that looks like fully open california, whatever that looks like. i'm thrilled and looking forward to a good summer. and i want to think about michael christianson who offered a report for us on san francisco. i appreciated the analysis you provided of where people are and the status of the cannabis dispensaries in san francisco, so thank you. >> clerk: thank you. if there are no additional commissioner comments and questions, we can move on to department matters. item 8, director's

announcements. >> thank you. i just wanted to take a moment during this meeting to resides, celebrate, and thank delvin washington who is joining us today. he's retiring this week, tomorrow, after 24 years of service with the department. delvin joined in 1997 which may not seem like a long time ago, but if you look at the issues of the day, we were blockbusters. he is a team leader and has been leading the southeast section of the quadrant for many years. many of you know delvin from his years on the commissioner. like i say, it was great to see a case that delvin was managing. he's a great problem solver.

personality-wise, he made the room brighter. he's calm and cool and has an infectious smile. he's been a great planner to newcomers and he's monitored extraordinary planners in the department. his presence will be missed. he's not leaving the pay area. he was born and raised in oakland, where it sounds like he's going to stay. him and his wife are joining us, his wife of 30 years. he's going to wrap up his community-based work and advocate for the community-based cupes. we thank him for his service to

the city. >> it's been an awrn with san francisco planning. there's been a lot of growth in the department. we've doubled in side. it's an excellent group of people. i can see just the fact that we have a staff memberer on the planning commission and a former commission member on staff. we are making moves to make it a more inclusive department. we're striving to make it better and i'm very proud of it. now, it's been an honor working with san francisco. i was just a little skinny kid

growing up in east oakland, but i just always felt if you keep a good attitude on what you're trying to do, you can reach your goals, learning from the department and people that i've been able to bring to the department's family. i'm really proud of the staff i've been able to fire and gone on to have a lot of good work with the city. i have nothing but joy and honor and pride that i worked with this organization. you haven't heard the last of me. i will keep in touch.

my wife has been doing volunteer inoculations. it's been beautiful and i've really enjoyed working with the department and the city. it's been great. >> thanks for your very kind words and he is very cool and calm under pressure in what he does at work and at home are completely different. he's not a planner at home. >> she does all the planning. >> so no, he's enjoyed it. really been a great career for him at the city.

he's very proud of who he hired and who he worked with and his late nights at the commission have not been unlike mine. i wanted to thank globally the department. >> i've almost circled the bay. >> i want to start by saying, again, thanks for everything, delvin. first of all, i'm extremely jealous. enjoy your free time from here on out. i hoped this was something we could do in person. i think the last time we saw each other face-to-face was a retirement party.

at least i have that memory with you. best wishes. >> i had the pleasure of working face-to-face with delvin over the years, not just in chambers, but also in the planning department because there were meetings that required us to be present. the one thing is he very much camouflaged his age. he doesn't look like retirement and he never did even then. we worked on quite a few. he looks like he was 20 years younger than retirement. i have my fellow commissioners who did not have the pleasure of meeting you three-dimensionally,

he is a wonderful person and you will be greatly missed. all the best and you are lucky your wife is retired too. the world is yours. all the best. thank you. >> it's really great to at least virtually see you. i just can't agree more. there is definitely no way to fill your shoes and who you are in the department. i'm excited for you and proud that i got to work alongside of you. maybe you can teach more public

servants how to remain cool under pressure. you can send me some tips if you have them. >> i'll do that happen [laughter]. >> as someone who used to represent applicants in front of the commission and i worked with the department in that capacity, i wanted to let you know that i always felt a sense of relief when you were brought in to a matter because we knew that we would get your unique blend of progt /* progt pragmaticism. >> clerk: that concludes commissioner comments.

i'll just say, congratulations, delvin. he's all yours. does that conclude announcements? >> it does. >> clerk: item 9. review of past events at the board of supervisors. i don't have any update. >> aaron starr manager of legislative affairs. a quick report today at the land use this week, the community heard of the land martin house which is eligible for this status because it has made a contribution to san francisco

history. this is associated with the history of the [indiscernible] -- the first lesbian organization in the united states and is the first of this kind here. we heard this item on february 17 and recommended approval. at first there were three members of the public who spoke in favor and none against it. the full board was recommended this. the landmark designation, allegory of california, this starts the landmark in process but still needs to be reviewed. that's all i have for you today. thank you very much. >> clerk: thank you. if there are no questions from

the commissioner to mr. starr through the chair there is a member of the public requesting to speak. shall we find out what they want to say. >> i was calling for general public comment, but i want to congratulate delvin washington and i will wait back in line for public testimony. we will miss you, delvin. >> clerk: commissioners, again, if there are no questions, we can move on to general public comment. members of the public, you can address the commission. with respect to agenda items, your opportunity will be afforded. people can address the commission for up to three minutes and when the member speaks, the item may be moved to

the end of the agenda. you need to press star 3 to be entered into the queue. when you hear that your line has been unmuted, that is your indicate to start speaking. >> this is sue hester again. the commission needs to follow its own rules and regulations. the commission rules require that staff packets are due one week in advance of a hearing, which is thursday before 5:00 which is close of business currently they're only available when the agenda comes out late friday afternoon. it's too late at that point for members of the public to read and send comments to commissioners. that is a really important issue. i really request the staff packets get reverted back to

regular release. secondly, the planning commission imposes time limits on speakers. the public is allowed three minutes generally on the first hearing on an issue. when they're continued and there's a second hearing, it's normal that the planning commission would have a reduced time limit for that place, but the hearing two weeks ago on 468 turk was announced a one-limit time limit on the first hearing. it was a esero hearing, very complicated, big project in the tenderloin. if the public testimony is truncated by the president and it gives the president to do that, it should be announced that he's doing that publicly and not just announced by the

secretary that there's a one-minute time limit. second issue is besides the rules and retaliations, what should be a three-hour hearing becomes five hours. please calendar a discussion of going back to city hall. >> clerk: that is your time. >> congratulations to mr. washington. i sent you some pictures of a

house and just sent you something else about it too. it may be on the screen, it may not. anyway. this is a house that had a [indiscernible] -- it's an alteration permit. it's sold for $950,000 in 2014 then the entitlement was sold for $2.9 million in 2017 and it just recently sold -- well, october of 2020 for $4.23 million. so there were no complaints to planning enforcement, but if you look at the pictures that i sent in and they're not on the screen, but that's okay. i understand the problem, i think that it's a further issue with the alter rations and demolitions and all that.

i'll just make one more point -- there it is up there. maybe a house like this, an a-rated house is something that should be analyzed by the cultural resources group that will do that and i know they have no eval on this. if you look at the garage door if you ever see it, there was supposed to be wooden slats and instead a glass door. it sounds like being fussy about it, but i think it's important for an a-rated house, never mind the details of the work done on it. common sense, it looks like a demolition. thank you. take care. be well. be safe. goodbye. >> linda chapman, you have

somewhere in your department who are issuing maps that are absolutely contrary to the height limits after 5,000 signatures were gathered and conferred with robert pathmore who was our mentor about who height limit we should request. we were willing to go above the 40 feet that the planning commission intended to give us until chinatown -- well, what became chinatown t.b.c. had objections. we went and talked with gordon what was their concern. ours was to conserve the rental housing with demolition the and profile and so on and so forth. the concern was maybe if there was a buyer 40 feet there would have to be a garage and housing.

we conferred about the fact that retail might need another 15 feet. we requested 50 to 65 feet in the whole area that we're talking about here. we requested 80 feet rightly or wrongly. and we were requested to accept 160 feet. well, that turned out to be a mistake. everything that was up there was planned to be demolished. we had to fight to change that. we also later requested downsizing the 80-foot area. those things were passed unanimously by the board of supervisors as far as i know.

maybe after the map that was found, there were additional changes. how hard can it be to find the maps passed by the board of supervisors? one, you need to investigate who this planner is and come up with the maps. >> clerk: that is your time. members of the public, last call for general public comment. seeing no request to speak, general public comment is closed. item 10, case 2016-01600 env for the sfpuc southern skyline boulevard ridge trail extension project. the public comment for this item ended earlier. public comment may be received,

but a public comment may not be included in the final d.i.r. >> i am tim johnson, planning department staff and environmental coordinator for the southern skyline boulevard extension project. should i share my screen?

>> clerk: you have been provided privileges and should be able to do that now. >> here we go. case-by-case. >> i will provide a brief overview of the environmental review process and the provisions. the project site is in the sfpuc watershed. the site is undeveloped except for some roads and dams existing with reservoirs. case by case -- transfer of a

public access easement along the existing ridge trail segment to the sfpuc. dose and supervise access along the 5 k ridge hill as well as unrestricted access along a new bridge trail. variant one consists of access along an unfenced ridge trail and/or an unfenced southern skyline ridge trail.

variant two is unrestricted access along a fenced southern ridge trail. variant three consists of restricted access along a fenced ridge trail and/or a fenced southern skyline ridge trail. regarding biological resources, the proposed project and variants two and three would result in the spread of plant pathogens that cause death to certain plants and variants two and three would cause impacts to special status species. the proposed projects as well as

variants two and three would increase the risk of conflicts between vehicles and cyclists or pedestrians attempting to cross state route 92 where no marking exists. due to the project's significant and unavoid impacts, the sfpuc would need to adopt a statement of overriding considerations in order to approve the proposed project. the e.i.r. analyzed four project alternatives. the no project alternative, a relocated parking lot and trailhead as well as an alternative trail alignment. only the no project alternative would have all the impacts identified in the d.i.r.

relocating the parking lot and trail head south of state route 92 would avoid the impact on the transportation hazard, but not on biological resources, whereas the pedestrian-only access and alternative alignments would not avoid the transportation impact, but each would not avoid the transportation impact and would still each cause at least one of the significant and avoidable impacts on biological resources. the impacts including noise, transportation and wildlife and hazards. this site identifies the key dates of the ceqa review. in summary, the department

solicited and incorporated the public on the scope of the analysis and held public hearings on the planning process. the public submitted comments [indiscernible] which covered a range of topics. the department published the responses to comments on the draft e.i.r. on april 14, 2021. we also issued an errata on april 19, adding a comment letter to the letter from s.f. urban riders that we had inadvertently omitted from the april 14 responses to comments

document. all of the issues raised in this letter related to the accuracy are fully addressed in the april 14 responses. these documents have been provided to the commission as part of the project's hearing packet. the responses document in combination with the draft e.i.r. constitute the final e.i.r. which is before you today for certification. the final e.i.r. is adequate and provides decision-makers and the public with the information required pursuant to ceqa to understand the potential environmental impacts of the project as well as the alternatives and mitigation measures. on this basis we request that the commission adopt the certification most before you. this motion does not approve the project, but ensures the content and procedures comply with ceqa.

this concludes my presentation on the e.i.r. certification and i will be available for questions during the public comment period. >> clerk: thank you, tim. members of the public, this is your opportunity to speak to this matter by pressing star and 3 to be added to the queue. when you hear that your line has been unmuted, that's your indication to begin speaking. we had one caller requesting to speak and then none -- oh, there we go. you have two minutes. go ahead caller. last chance, caller. okay. we'll take the next person queued to speak.

>> our plan is 70% complete with almost 40 miles. this project [indiscernible] 60 miles of bridge trail which is which is one of our largest projects. no other project in the e.i.r. achieves the stated objectives related to the bridge trail nor [indiscernible] -- two other

highway locations along highway 35 and lower crystal springs. the counsel looks to address the highway crossing in the future. we strongly support the staff recommendation of a permit access program for this ridge

trail. this program would provide more access for the watershed lands. thank you for the opportunity to comment on this important project. our volunteers all encourage action to -- >> clerk: thank you. that is your time. >> i am a native of the bay area. i want to thank the staff for doing such a thorough job on this e.i.r. i wanted to encourage the commission to understand and appreciate the significant value this watershed has contributed to this way of life.

if you can't replace that -- can't put a value on that. you have that take that into consideration with the diminishing pristine habitat that now exists in your state and the region. it is diminishing every day with wildfire preparedness that is destroying literally in your state millions of acres of habitats. preserving the habitat today is more certain than ever and it should be a priority over recreational uses. i applaud the staff, a wonderful and thorough job and i hope the

commission looks at the no project alternative or the alternative number one that is docent led only access. thank you to the sfpuc and to the planning commission for preserving this beautiful and natural treasure. have a great day. clenchts members of the public, last call for public comment on this item. you have two minutes. go ahead, caller. okay. we cannot hear you if you're speaking.

so that will conclude public comment on this item and the matter is now before you, commissioners. >> today we're still taking comments, not approving anything? >> clerk: actually, commissioner, this item is for your certification, so it is an action item. >> move to certify the e.i.r. >> clerk: thank you. seeing no request to speak from commissioners, this is a motion that has been seconded to

certify the environmental impact report on that motion. [ roll call ] >> i have some questions, secretary. i do not see the chat box properly indicating the topics that we're talking about so it's very hard to follow. do you see that? >> clerk: my staff is putting in the items and i can see it. you need to press the chat icon to open up your chat bar. >> i as well. i'm seeing the commissioners' names who are speaking, but i haven't seen the christian individual items. >> clerk: oh, i do apologize.

chan, you're sending it to me privately. you'll need to send them to everyone, please, on the next item. thank you. commissioners, items 11 and 12 have been continued on to 13 a

to d. commissioners, although these are technically two separate projects, they are being called up together because the ceqa analysis was performed on both projects as one large project. they are two separate office buildings on a through lot that has been subdivided. so it will be up to you if you want to take up the matters separately when we call the question or if you want to make a motion for the entire project. staff, are you prepared to make your presentation? >> thanks. good afternoon, commissioners. i am planning department staff. the items before you are for two proposed projects one at 474 bryant street and the other at

stillman street. these will create two separate lots and construction of two 85-foot tall mixed-use buildings on the parcels. each building will consist of the upper floor, main and basement garage. in order for this to proceed, the commission must grant two separate authorizations pursuant to section 329 to allow the construction of two projects that would each totally over [indiscernible] -- 155 r for all those on bryant street. the commission must grant two separate office development authorizations for 312 and 322.

[indiscernible] the office use is small of the allocation program. in addition to planning section, the shadow casts must be diverted to the use of this park -- [indiscernible] and a large part of the authorization for each project. for shadows, the planning department and the two projects together in order to provide complete information about the total shadow impacts for both projects. the shadow load will be 0.003 above current levels for shadow.

the new shadow from the construct would impact the southern edge of the park. new shadows will last for 9 minutes and 6 seconds. it was determined this was an insignificant amount of net new shadow on the park. for small office allocations, the projects provide two new office buildings, each up to 49,499 gross square feet. as of december 10, 2020, approximately 728,338 gross square feet is available for the projects. these two projects represent approximately 13.7% of the currently available small

allocation pool. any subsequent increase in square footage in either buildings will remove the project. the project will be required to obtain approval from the large allocation pool. in terms of p.d.r. replacement requires replacing 70% of the existing p.d.r. spaces. currently there are 22,322 square feet of p.d.r. on which the two projects are located at. each project will even its replacement requirements and require p.d.r. use for a total new replacement of 17,132 square feet. the neighborhood preapplication

meeting was held on may 4, 2020, followed by additional hours available for phone calls and video conference later. the sponsor is currently working in collaboration. to date the planning department has not received any correspondence in opposition. [indiscernible] and objectives and policies of the general plan. this proposal new office buildings will extend employment opportunities for city residents and help retain existing commercial activities and attract new activities which is the goal for the city. the projects will provide offstreet parking spaces and exceed the number of required bicycle parking spaces to

encourage biking. the project sponsor is here and has prepared a presentation. this concludes staff presentation and we are available for any questions. >> clerk: thank you, xinyu. project important, you will have seven minutes to make your presentation. >> thank you. can you put up our presentation, please.

the project has two small spots at the bottom of the park. the rec and parks decided this was not -- next slide again. the significant impact eliminating the shadow would have -- next slide. we would have to have a significant setback at the front of the building at the top floor. the rec and park commission decided this does not have a significant impact. the project requires roughly 100,000 square feet of new space

and over 700,000 square feet is still available. one of the principal issues was to extract two-thirds for public benefit and this project will pay over $100 of impact fees to the office. we are just about to sign an m.o.u. directing all of the arts leads for these two projects to fund a gateway project here. so thank you and now i'm going to introduce the architect. >> can you see the slide? the buildings are quite similar,

but their frontage in terms of solar exposure is different. on the one side the sun angles will be low and on the bryant side it will be high. on this slide you can see two sister buildings which have a well-defined case which is expressive of the p.d.r. functions behind. you can see the roll-up doors in case of events and you can see the two strategies around solar shading and frontage. the bryant street building on the left has a contemporary expression. the stillman street building is using brick to work well with the many brick buildings in the neighborhood. on this slide you can see the site plan, the through site at

the street level will be preserving the existing trees and on the other side there are no existing trees so we will be adding those to the site. we are looking to establish three curb cuts and putting in two more which are critical to the functioning of the p.d.r. next slide, please. here you can see the basement for bryant street. the primary function is to serve as p.d.r. for above. you will see the loading and areas. it is there to support. on the left is the basement with a similar function. it includes 14 parking spaces. on the right side of the image is the ground floor plan for bryant street. there are also provisions included to support bike

transit, including bike lockers and showers. in this slide you can see the floor plan. this has an entry located in the upper left corner of the image. here you can see the typical floor plans which are left open in order to maximize flexibility for tenants. in this slide you see the roof plans where we located the mechanical spaces. the middle portion will be a publicly accessible roof deck and this is creating a nice environment and also protecting the building from solar radiation. here you can see the program stacking of the six office levels above one level of p.d.r. and one level of basement.

in this image you can see the main materials of the project. we've made factory style buildings. on the left it's an aside and you can see the concrete which we are using for timeless quality and durability. on the right is warm terra cotta which is used for the buildings in the neighborhood. these are perforated on the right side to allow for visibility for the occupants in the interior. you can see the elevations and the way they have been composed at the public level with a much lighter articulation.

it's been broken up into five volumes to help relate to the scale of the street. we've worked here to create two buildings which are independently responsive to the neighborhood while being complementary of each other. this concludes our presentation. thank you so much. >> clerk: if that concludes your presentation, we'll open this up. this is your opportunity to be added to the queue, members of the public comment, by pressing star and 3. i see no members of the public wishing to speak to public comment, commissioners. the matter is closed and is before you. >> i am delighted to see a first project in central soma which so

well resides the rules and the guidelines. i am in full support. i also wanted to thank ms. lee for an exceptionally good project report. you touched on every point particularly for us at this scale. the first building will not all have the subtleties of the central soma guidelines before us. it was easy to read and great to read. i would like to move to approve because i'm so excited about the project. >> second. >> i would definitely support this project. i did have a question for the

project sponsor. what use will occupy this space or something that comes along further in the project? interested if you have any p.d.r. uses. i above this design. >> john keppel with the project sponsor. this is one of the first projects that has been subject to this where p.d.r. has been demolished and a new p.d.r. space is actually being constructed. prop x has had more of a space of not demolishing. this project sponsor in addition to others, we're looking at what

is permitted. to be the one that appears to be most in demand in the market, none of these spaces have obviously come online. so i think this discussion is further going to develop as projects like this come through. that is a long way of saying we don't know yet, but that is what we're seeing. >> thank you. i'll look forward to what we see there and it will add to the sigh vie /* -- vibrancy of the area. >> i also want to thank the project sponsor for this in a cultural heritage district and also to maintain the p.d.r. uses. i really appreciate those efforts when project sponsors

are looking into this. when it comes to the shadow impact on the south part, i do also think the impact is less significant, especially that it's in the hours around nighttime, even though it's during summer. again, thank you very much and i'm ready to vote. >> clerk: if there is nothing further, there is a motion seconded to adopt shadow findings, approve the authorizations, and office development authorizations for the projects there. for clarification, the motion to adopt the amended motions that were submitted to you yesterday from staff. [ roll call ]

>> clerk: item 14 b for the property to consider the variant. go ahead. >> the request before you today is for a conditional authorization to legalize [indiscernible] in an existing residence in order to comply with an active planning enforcement case. the party has a history which i will outline shortly in which the project sponsors can elaborate on. a request for variance to the setbacks. just to provide some background, the current owners and the enforcement history, the current

owners received variants to build up the brick foundation and to complete the renovations. during construction, the builder hired at the same time [indiscernible] areas of structural framework beyond the scope of what was approved. these areas and items were replaced in kind. the footprint of the building was not experienced. the d.d.i. violation and enforcement case were opened which confirmed that this was beyond the scope of what was approved. during the department's enforcement investigation, it became apparent that the rear of the building had been modified [indiscernible] -- which dated from 1987. from sometime in the 1990s and

the early 2000s, the building was [indiscernible] in combination with the additional work in 2018 and 2019 exceeded the 2017 threshold [indiscernible] demolition. as stated previously, this is a demolition related to the [indiscernible] -- the project concluded the addition of a second unit [indiscernible] -- one piece of correspondence was

received in support. no letters or correspondence in opposition have been received. it is believed the project is necessary and desirable for a number of reasons. [indiscernible] the project will be developed [indiscernible] families. the project will also be compatible with the rh 2 zoning district by adding a second unit. this concludes staff presentation. >> clerk: thank you, staff. project sponsor, you will have five minutes. does he have slide? >> he does.

good afternoon, [indiscernible] i'm the architect representing the sponsor and his family. the project before you today is after a long series of missteps by the builder of the

renovations at this location back in 2018 and 2019 which resulted in enforcements which were tantamount to demolition. we're here to make that right and seek your approval to do renovations on site to move the family home. first a little history. the family hired a builder in 2018 to effect the renovations to the home, on the basement, the main level, and the attic above. the builder services was to get the permits but he exceeded the scope. the owners understood the consequences of these means and methods and decisions.

the builder has the abandoned his project and is unreachable since. in november 2018, rodrigo sanchez was recommended. to his credit, he worked through many issues and held a community meeting in may 2020 resulting in neighborhood support around the project. once the projects with d.b.i. were found, they decided to do a reset. they hired our firm to take over to compile new drawings in satisfaction of the department and to seek and justification the variants to legalize the non-conformities on the site. notably, it was also decided due

to the additional living areas and bedrooms on the top floor, the owners could forego the occupying of the basement itself and generate an additional unit to generate income for the construction and the cost of the overrun. the project required approval for exceeding limits of section 317. as we analyze the removal and replacement of the building emblems, it became evident that while this existing [indiscernible] the massing of a victorian home is much the same as before when the building permit was issued. the building footprint is unchanged. while the basement was not

excavated in the 1997 permit, the main living is extended to within 10.5 feet of the rear property line. in 1997 it has this in the front setback. the rear is allowing more living space and the mass renovated [indiscernible] -- variances required. in addition to the authorization, the project needs approval for the following variants. a front setback variance is required. the garage was demolished and rebuilt. the rear variants are needed to

expand the variance under the modified roof. and an open space variance is required from the code minimum for private open space. we request your approval to put this back on legal footing and to bring this dwelling unit into the eureka valley. thank you. i'm available for questions. >> clerk: thank you. that concludes the project sponsor presentation. we should open this up to members of the public. this is your opportunity to speak to this item by pressing star 3.

>> hello, i didn't really know all those details about it and it's very interesting, but i do think it's important, a couple of points i would like to make about this unusual but it will problem with the demolition. i sent in -- i'm trying to sent in a comparison of the calculations submit in 2017 and those done by mr. morrison. what troubles me about the 2017 calculations is those look like those on projects that get through as alter rations. maybe this is an intellectual exercise, but it's really important to consider it. the other point i would like to make and i talked to staff about it this morning about criterion

eye in the findings. this is still a demolition, although it's a very peculiar, unfortunate one. this still raised the question of the loss of relative affordability. it came up last week and i forgot to mention it with the 2119 castra street which was a real demolition from the start. and i was going to look at the one for this week, i was concerned because i think it's a change in policy -- it sounded like a change in policy where you're saying you can demolish but you still have relative affordability and i think that's not your policy, at least not in the master plan as i had not in the housing element. there are the comparisons on the screen and i think it's something to look at.

why did mr. santos think he could get away with that? is that standard practice? what does that mean? i hope the people have their house and their happy and good luck. that's the end of my comments. >> clerk: thank you. last chance for public comment on this item. you need to press star 2 to be added to the queue. public comment is closed and the matter is now before you. >> i would like to voice my support for planning's recommendation. >> i would like to voice my support for this project particularly when it is as well explained as mr. morrison did.

these projects are very difficult to understand given the history and the beginning point that is difficult to trace. thank you for that explanation and i applaud the applicant for adding a full-sized unit on it. i see that as an exemplary model to follow suit. thank you very much and i'm in full support. >> i definitely agree. i know it's been a journey for the owners of the building because you have a contractor not following the rules and you had to switch gears. thank you for this project and the full-sized unit as well. i wanted to applaud that. i had a question that is minute. is there a closet in the bedroom

or is all the closet in the hallway? it might be better to have a closet in the bedroom part of the unit. maybe the architect can answer. >> i believe it has a closet in it. this is an odd situation because the lower level was not originally envisioned as a unit. so now you have this awkward condition where you have to enter what could have been a room. it might end up sleeping better as a two bedroom than a one-unit. it has open space to the two streets and an open space in the back. >> i looked on the drawings. the closet doors were on the hallway side of the bedroom and not facing into the bedroom. just something you may consider

having access to the space from within the bedroom. maybe it's an oversight on my part. i'm in full support. unless commissioners want to comment, i would move the project. >> second. >> clerk: everyone is sending the messages to me privately. no wonder you can't see them. >> apologies on that. i realized it as soon as i put it in. i also just wanted to address the variants briefly. this is a unique situation that's gone through its trials and tribulations. it is requesting three different variants like i feel in this case are justified. the front and back are informed.

the other lots that are on the corner of this street and the rear yard, this lot is located in the corner. the location is tough into the corner that it doesn't really abut the midblock open space. the open space requirement is essentially six inches short of meeting the minimum requirements in the code and getting to the technical requirements for the open space is an extremely open attempt to meet the circumstances of this case. >> clerk: thank you very much. seeing no further requests to speak from commissioners or the

zoning administrator, there is a motion that has been seconded to approve this. on that motion. [ roll call ] >> clerk: thank you, commissioners. that motion passes unanimously 7-0. >> i will close the public hearing for the variance and send them in. >> clerk: we are on the final item for the agenda number 15, 2020-009424 cua. this is a conditional use authorization. i believe that director hiller had some introductory comments.

>> before i start, i wanted to introduce louis, this is his first presentation. he is a san francisco native. he graduated from lincoln high school in the sunset prior to joining the department he graduated with a bachelor's of science. welcome, elton. >> thank you so much. good afternoon, commissioners, i am planning department staff. the item before you is a conditional use authorization pursuant to planning code sections 202 and 303. it includes a request to

demolish an existing single-family dwelling unit and subdivide the existing 50-foot-wide lot into two 25-foot-wide lots and to construct two single-family dwelling units, one on each new lot one at 231 and 235 wilde avenue measuring approximately [indiscernible] and 3 -- measuring 3,069 gross square feet at 235 wilde avenue. there are two off-street parking and one bike parking. to date the department has not received any correspondence about this project. the project site has been vacant since 2019. in conclusion, the project finds that the project is consistent

with the objectives and policies of the general plans. the proposed new building is designed to be in keeping with the existing development pattern and respond to the residential neighborhood character along the avenue. the project provides two new units with easy access to the city transit network. the project is found to be necessary and compatible with the surrounding neighborhood. in addition, correcting the additional conditions of approval regarding parking, there will be two offstreet parking units instead of one per parking units. the project sponsor team is here and has a presentation.

this concludes that presentation and i am here for any questions. thank you. >> clerk: thank you. mr. shab, are you prepared to make your presentation? >> i am, yes. >> clerk: okay. your slides are up and you have five minutes. >> thank you. my name is jeremy shab, representing the owner. thank you for this hearing today. i also wanted to thank elton for getting us this far. we are proposing this new project. the existing building is a small single-family dwelling that has been owner occupied until 1996 until the owner passed away in 2019.

the home has large setbacks on each sides. it also encroaches into the rear yard. the existing floor plan is also awkward with only two bedrooms across the frontage with potentially two rh 5s underutilized. this shows a comparison of building massing before and after. this is our proposed site plan with the original profile in green. the proposed two new buildings are fully code compliant with upper code compliant setbacks. this is a rendering of our proposed buildings from downhill. we are proposing these buildings with a height stepping down the hill.

both building store plans are similar. both have two-car garages with a bicycle parking and spaces in the rear. the second plans have additional three rooms. we have light and air to adjacent structures. this rendering shows the building from uphill and wilde avenue. for our neighborhood outreach we held our neighborhood meeting in october of 2020 on zoom with four neighbors in attendance. a few had some concern of loss

of parking, which we feel is addressed by the side setbacks and two-car parking. we heard some opposition to a.d.u.s on site, which we are not proposing. i wanted to note this project provides new housing for families on a currently oversized lot. the existing housing is substandard. the project has been reviewed at the planning department. we respectfully ask that you grant the c.u. authorization and approve the project. thank you. >> clerk: thank you. if that concludes your presentation, we should open up for public comment. members of the public, this is your opportunity to address the commission on this matter by pressing star 3. when you hear you are unmuted,

that is your queue to start speaking. you will have two minutes. >> my name is stacy. can you hear me? >> clerk: we can. >> i am a native san franciscan and i have been living at one of the adjacent buildings next to the proposed property since birth. during this time from what the architect shared is a meeting was held in october of last year, however, our residents and occupants were not invited to that meeting on october 20. at the close of that meeting we were informed by our neighbors that the proposed property was being discussed and they were disgruntled of the proposed installation of a two-stair dwelling that was next to that. so with this proposed plan that

they have, it definitely removes all living space light for the adjacent property. they will not have any natural light whatsoever coming onto their property. with the homes across the street and there are three of them, it removes the views that they are accustom to for multiple generations that looks over to the bay. in terms of our view, it removes all living space views from our family. that means from the living room to the family room and dining room kitchen, no longer any views we would have access to. it would inhibit parking. this creates for more auto damage [indiscernible] -- i'm

requesting as a long-term resident that they consider a single-family home in place of the two, two-storeys. >> clerk: thank you. that's your time. last call, members of the public, for this item. you need to pless star 3. okay, commissioners, seeing no members of the public wishing to speak, public comment is closed and this item is before you. >> welcome, elton, great to have you with the team and i'm in favor of the staff recommendation. >> thank you. also in favor of staff recommendation. commissioner wu, can you clarify if there are any impacts that were discovered in terms of light of the adjacent properties blocking the windows?

i'm just curious if that is happening as a member of the public noted. >> regarding presidential design guidelines, we did make sure there was setbacks in order to prevent it from blocking any additional light or shadows. >> thank you so much. i saw a colleague pop up. i don't know if you wanted anything to add. >> no, i'm here for moral support. mr. wu answered the question appropriately. >> i'm really supportive of this project. i'm happy to see two homes coming in and i'm very supportive of the project.

thank you. >> welcome, mr. wu, for your first presentation. thank you very much. i am of two minds. while i greatly appreciate the ability to take an oversized lot and intensify development, we are basically putting two regularly shaped large buildings in length into an environment where all building forms are more or less new forms that leave random patterns of open space and patterns to be enjoyed by neighbors. the comment i'm making is not in support of protecting views, but also in support of not challenging a random plan of

individual buildings. so i hear the last commenter speaking to that. these buildings are intensifying development and they are also quite relentless relative to the setting they're in. again, i am of two mindsets and i would like to hear other commissioners. particularly if you look at drawing a.1.0, which is the overall site plan. >> clerk: there is a member of the public wishing to speak. should we afford them that opportunity? >> this is stacy --

>> clerk: i'm sorry, we don't allow commenters two bites of the apple. if the commissioners have questions of you, they might call on you. commissioners, you may continue your deliberations. do i hear a motion, anyone? >> i wanted to say i too am in favor of this project. i think we need to work hard to encourage family housing in the city and i, for one, have always been troubled by the definition of two bedrooms. so i am glad to see some options where family options include four bedrooms.

i recognize that that includes f.a.r. >> is that a motion? >> yes, move to approve. >> seconded. >> i just would like to question commissioner moore on -- because i appearing support this project as well. what i'm trying to get from you is i think -- i do understand [indiscernible] -- it looks like it's going to be four bedrooms.

i think that also for me, we should try to confirm the staff recommendations -- >> are you asking me a question? >> yes, commissioner moore. >> there is a level of the effects of larger family housing grouping of two buildings outweighs my criticism and in the end residential design

guidelines are in the eye of the beholder. we have all different kinds of ways of looking at it and to me it's important to always look at context. however, the benefit of the larger-family units of which we have two here outweighs my hesitation of the manufacturing. i'm in support of the building and i second the motion. >> clerk: if there is nothing further, there is a motion accepted to approve this. [ roll call ] . >> clerk: so moved. that motion concludes unanimously and concludes your agenda today. you got some of the time back

this week. enjoy the rest of the afternoon and we'll see you next week. [♪♪♪]

>> i love teaching. it is such an exhilarating experience when people began to feel their own creativity. >> this really is a place where all people can come and take a class and fill part of the community. this is very enriching as an artist. a lot of folks take these classes and take their digital imagery and turn it into negatives. >> there are not many black and white darkrooms available anymore. that is a really big draw. >> this is a signature piece. this is the bill largest

darkroom in the u.s.. >> there are a lot of people that want to get into that dark room. >> i think it is the heart of this place. you feel it when you come in. >> the people who just started taking pictures, so this is really an intersection for many generations of photographers and this is a great place to learn because if you need people from different areas and also everyone who works here is working in photography.

>> we get to build the community here. this is different. first of all, this is a great location. it is in a less-populated area. >> of lot of people come here just so that they can participate in this program. it is a great opportunity for people who have a little bit of photographic experience. the people have a lot, they can really come together and share a love and a passion. >> we offer everything from traditional black and white darkrooms to learning how to process your first roll of film. we offer classes and workshops in digital camera, digital

printing. we offer classes basically in the shooting, ton the town at night, treasure island. there is a way for the programs exploring everyone who would like to spend the day on this program. >> hello, my name is jennifer. >> my name is simone. we are going on a field trip to take pictures up the hill. >> c'mon, c'mon, c'mon. >> actually, i have been here a lot. i have never looked closely enough to see everything.

now, i get to take pictures. >> we want to try to get them to be more creative with it. we let them to be free with them but at the same time, we give them a little bit of direction. >> you can focus in here. >> that was cool. >> if you see that? >> behind the city, behind the houses, behind those hills. the see any more hills? >> these kids are wonderful. they get to explore, they get to see different things. >> we let them explore a little bit. they get their best.

if their parents ever ask, we can learn -- they can say that they learned about the depth of field or the rule of thirds or that the shadows can give a good contrast. some of the things they come up with are fantastic. that is what we're trying to encourage. these kids can bring up the creativity and also the love for photography. >> a lot of people come into my classes and they don't feel like they really are creative and through the process of working and showing them and giving them some tips and ideas. >> this is kind of the best kept secret. you should come on and take a class. we have orientations on most saturdays. this is a really wonderful

location and is the real jewel to the community. >> ready to develop your photography skills? the harvey milk photo center focuses on adult classes. and saturday workshops expose youth and adults to photography classes.

>> meeting on april 28th, 2021, and the time is 5:01. this meeting is being held by webex pursuant to the governor's executive orders declaring the existence of a local emergency. during covid-19 emergency, the fire commission's regular meeting room at city hall is closed and meetings of the fire commission will convene remotely. you may watch live at www.sfgovtv.org and to participate during public comment, please call (415) 655-0001 and use access code 187 700 4408. members of the public will have opportunities to participate during public comment.

the public is asked to wait for the particular agenda item before making public comment on that item. comments will be addressed in the order they are received. when the moderator announces that the commission is taking public comment, members of the public can raise their hand by pressing star 3 and you will be queued. callers will hear silence when waiting for your turn to speak. operator will unmute you. when prompted, callers will have the standard 3 minutes to provide comment. please ensure you are in a quiet location, speak clearly, and turn off any tvs or radios around you. item one, roll call. [roll call]

general public comment. members of the public may address the commission for up to 3 minutes on any item within the commission's jurisdiction. that does not appear on the agenda. speaker shall address their remarks to the department as a whole and not to individual personnel. commissioners may not enter into debate or discussion with the speaker. the lack of response by the commission or the department personnel is not necessarily constitute agreement with or support of statements made during public comment. i will check the public comment line. and there is nobody on the public comment line. >> president: all right. thank you, madam secretary.

public comment will be closed. >> secretary: item 3, approval of the minutes. discussion and possible action to approve the meeting minutes of the regular meeting of april 14th, 2021. and there's nobody on the public comment line. >> president: all right. public comment is closed and i see commissioner covington. yes. >> commissioner: regarding the minutes, i would like to have included your statements regarding the possibility of setting up a committee. you were suggesting a committee to review slow streets. and that isn't reflected in the minutes. also, i would suggest that slow streets since it is a term of art be capitalized.

capital "s" and capital "s." >> president: any further comments on the minutes? >> commissioner: and i would like to move the minutes with those additions. >> president: let me just see if any other commissioners have any amendments, modifications, comments. i'm not seeing any hands. >> commissioner: i'll second the motion by. >> commissioner: covington. >> president: all right. thank you, commissioner cleveland. >> secretary: and i will take roll call vote. [roll call] it's unanimous. i will amended the minutes as suggested and post them later

this week. item 4. chief of department's report. report from chief of department jeanine nicholson including budget academies, special events, communications, and outreach to other government agencies of the public and reports on administration deputy chief jose vello on administrative divisions. fleet and facility status updates including updates from chief thomas o'connor on the auxiliary water supply system. finance support services and training within the department. >> good evening, president feinstein and other commissioners. greetings everyone. let's start with our vaccine update.

we are at approximately 75% and slowly climbing and i think we're seeing this in many places where there are some who are reluctant to still get it, but we are still putting the message out for our folks that it is still available to them and hoping that the people that have said "yes" will sign up for it. we are continuing to have conversations regarding the up coming budget and lots of fruitful conversations especially around the vision that we have for the department and community paramedicine for one and community paramedic division in this department because we have been so successful of what we do with ems6 and now with the street

crisis response team that there are more and more requests and our conversation has been that we need all the support in place for this division, administrative and otherwise to make it if they want it to keep going. it's really challenging to have one person at the top running it and, you know, and everybody else out on the street and not a ton of support because we need the bodies. so we are continuing to have those conversations being heard about the paramedic division and our street crisis response team was filmed again with chief simon pang by cbs this week and, as you know, it was

filmed by nbc nightly news a week or so ago. so, again, we're having those conversations with the mayor's budget office and really trying to figure out a path forward and i'll keep you updated with those conversations as they move forward. i recently had the opportunity to spend some time with district supervisor connie chan. she is the of the district. i took her to her district's stations. president finestein i know it maddens you that those are not in particular order on the map so let me just say it's out in the richmond district. >> president: that's all right, chief. we'll fix it. >> yeah. and she and i had the opportunity to discuss some of

the needs of the department and then on saturday in golden gate park. was so kind to attend our demonstration and some other folks organized and we provided a field demonstration of those hose tenders. so, you know, so the supervisor -- so it's hard to understand what a hose tender is if you don't see what happens. so she has a good understanding of that now and of our operations and how we would respond in a situation where we don't have all the water that we need. and then, you may have seen i was on nbc, i can't remember when either this week or

we have interdepartmental training on the 5th. we have been working with them to come up with training so we

can better understand each other's operations basically. so they can understand about, you know, where we need to go and what we need to do when we're on the scene of a fire in terms of, you know, not running over our hose lines and alike but also if you're going to pull over, you know, make sure you're not pulling over where one of our vehicles needs to be whether it's an arial truck or what have you. so we are going to have a -- it's a little bit of a modified version from what we did with police because we had awhile there where police would get to the fire first and park right in front or park at a hydrant or some other thing and it was challenging for us. so we've had really good conversations in classes with police. and so that program is being modified and taught to the mta

and, you know, they asked if we could train the trainer for them so they could actually deliver this class and we said, no, we would rather actually always have someone from the fingerprint in that room so we can have a subject matter there to talk them through some things. and, i believe that is all i have for this evening. so thank you, commissioners. >> president: thank you, chief. any questions for the chief of the department? commissioner rodriguez. you could be chief but i don't know that you'd like that job so we'll keep you as vice president. you're muted.

>> commissioner: okay. sorry. just out of curiosity, we received a letter about i guess a hostile environment from the party and i guess these issues have come up before about trying to privatize some of the medical services that the fire department is doing. so is there any response to this or is this just an ongoing process that we are really -- in other words, are we taking any action against this to show that this is going on and we want to not have our members working in this environment? or i would just like to be enlightened on it i guess. >> through the president, vice president rodriguez, is this a letter that was sent from our -- from local 798? i'm not sure what you're

referring to. >> commissioner: it says this is set by the san francisco democratic party and i guess it's to stop the hostile work environment of the paramedics of the san francisco fire department and these continued efforts to privatize public emergency medical services. >> president: this matter is actually not on the agenda. >> commissioner: okay. >> secretary: so i don't know how far we can go into it. the letter hasn't been posted. >> commissioner: okay. i understand. maybe at the end of the meeting i'll request we can put this on the agenda. >> i'm happy to brief you off line as well, vice president. i know exactly what you're speaking of and i'm happy to talk to you afterward. >> commissioner: okay.

>> president: questions from any commissioners? comments? i'm not seeing any. i'm sorry. commissioner nakajo. >> commissioner: thank you, madam president. this is not a question, but just a comment and an expression. in terms of p.r., chief, i thought the department [inaudible] crisis team have gotten great press, good press, on the national news. i also think that's positive in terms of our endeavors as well as the show cases confidence of our team. the other thing i wanted to say is i'm very appreciative of you as the chief of the department. you appear on national news. i caught that segment when you were being interviewed and i think that equally is good in the sense of definitely having representation of our department, but the fact that

we have a woman fire chief in san francisco, i thought spoke volumes in terms of the national exposure. the other thing i wanted to say is i really appreciate chief o'connor for last saturday's drill. yes, and having me join so i wouldn't have any [inaudible] and was greeted by the members in terms of chief o'connor, but also, correct me if i'm wrong chief rubenstein but i think it was stations 12 and 22. and the last thing is that chief nicholson, these presentations by the various components of the department, for example, battalion chief parks, the

[inaudible] of that as every package gives help in terms of wellness in terms of services. i'm really looking forward to chief o'connor's presentation. but that's where everybody gets the substance of the material. thank you, madam president. >> president: thank you, commissioner nakajo. further comments for any commissioners? madam secretary, do we have any public comment? >> secretary: there is no public comment. >> president: all right. public comment is also closed. and i believe we go on to chief bellow. >> good afternoon, president feinstein. chief nicholson. this is my report on the month of march. let me share my presentation.

can you all see it? >> president: yes. >> thank you. again, for what i do my report is highlight some of the items that my report and also those item that is because my report is at the end of the month, i've seen the last time as reported. so going into training, a lot of projects going on right now and in combination with chief arecedos it's been hard to get some of these classes to our members. additionally, we've hosted a class in instant management training not only for our members, but other agencies and we've also had the team develop their skills for the class, it was well attended. continuing to do the training that was given to us by the state. i'll show you some pictures of that that was done. we also have 30 members that have been trained to drive those vehicles when we go to fires.

as you said, this a busy month

training. in addition to that, we had and thanks to lieutenant fogul we had more training. in april, we did some night training as well too which is very important for us so we can operate day and night in different environments and we had good results in golden gate park. we have 23 out of the 25 recruits still in the class. week 12 out of the twentyth class. two more weeks of our san francisco skills testing. these are the skills, the ladders, the hoses, appliances that we do on a regular basis and we have ten weeks of

testing for that. after that, there's some additional training the crews have to go to which includes hazmat, fire survival that require to complete the firefighter 1 curriculum. once they're finished with that, there's the state testing where a certified firefighter academy to the firefighter 1 program to the state fire marshal office. so we need to do a state test too. so that's why it takes 20 weeks for someone to finish the academy. we're looking forward to graduation on june 25th and depending on the situation, hopefully we all can be there. some of the things we've learned these past few weeks. what you're seeing here is just a mock-up of a house that by introducing fire and ventilation topics and moving windows or roof openings, you see how the smoke travels and the fire travels. it's very important to understand that. it's a great conceptual idea and you need to understand when

you ventilate at the wrong time the wrong sequence. from them then, they'll move on to actual training. they will have live fire and spoke and everything. depending how you effect ventilation on a fire. the training staff held a training day with deputy sheriffs at the facility. there are many times the first one we develop the skills the reason being is the facilities they have, we arrive there. in order for them to be safe and operating the situation, we held the training for them. they were very thankful for that too. these are some of the pictures they did with them as well.

this will be the first one on this apparatus i just want to rephrase how important. not only vaccination sites. this is one we have been doing now for a few saturdays, supervisor haney was there too. they come in for training, special training they do. and, like the chief mentioned and the virtual tour that happened two saturdays ago and commissioner nakajo, you were there too and other staff and office department staff was there too. a couple of meetings ago continues to push classes for our members and mental health, first aid. it's very involved in the firefighter cancer cohort study. we're trying to track our new recruits coming in to the academy, female recruits and

seeing in their careers what is the effect of fire fighting with this gear. should have a baseline for them and in the meantime, we also study core members of the department too. to contain the information and wellness that we have. we continue to have meetings for the eap rfp. we're working on that to improve it to have a really good culture [inaudible] of counselors that we can help our members whether it's ptsd and all the issues they have too. so we're fine tuning that. and we continue to have safety meetings with different parties to make sure we're addressing all the issues we have. this is a picture that we have this past week at stanford. there's been a cancer study. we're doing research on the pfas exposure which is

something we've found in the fire fighting gear. we are seeing what that effect is and also has been for awhile to see what kind of levels they have. what we're doing is demanding that the next generation of turn-out codes we have, we're asking the manufacturers and we're in the process right now of producing and giving us gear that doesn't have pfos on it. it is a repellant. it was used if more years in the industry, but we also found it's cancer producing too. so we're trying to eliminate that and the industry is coming to that now where we have offers and materials that can do that, so we're really excited to see that and our contract we're doing now trials with exactly that pfas materials. so we're happy with that. so we continue to be busy with the help of vaccination sites. we have a continue to staff

this covid response units and we work with the chief of operations in field. like the chief mentioned, we're up to they never reported it and i'll continue to try to work the members who said no. so we expect these numbers continue to climb. but we continue to climb too. i hope you are receiving good information. showing different topics of health and safety for the members. so it's good to get members engaged in that. stephanie has been collected some of the recipes to our

daily routine in the fire house. we are already planning for the fall for the flu vaccine. we understand this year, the flu season has been very small due to everyone wearing masks, but we're planning for the next season and they're working on that too and we're able to vaccinate those members that are not reachable through different events. we're going to try to get even a higher number than last year. last year, before covid-19 was up to 70%. so we want to get high on that. we tested 71 members, randomly tested through a random program. o-negative. we conducted four tests and they were o-negative and continues to work on alcohol and drug tests for promotional and all the results all were negative. so that's good news. super services. moving along. the finishing touches are being done at the station, we'll

continue to have the point of contact issue that we're now actually digging on the ground so the project is moving forward with that. it's caused a little bit of a delay. internally, things are moving along. the walls are giving up and finishing up. you see that on the bay are really almost done and we are really finishing up pretty soon with that second floor. commissioner finestein as you said is a beautiful area. i think members are going to be extremely happy at that station once they move in. 49 is moving along as well. the staff of ems is working, already has a plan to move in next month. slowly moving with a final date and hopefully a nicer morning in june. so we are only a few months away from seeing the final station 49, but everything's almost complete right now. it's just -- we can't shut down operations so we have to do it

progressive moving and the staff 49 under the directive of the chief is working out really well. some of the entire your pictures. some of the kitchen area, the locker room and the storage racks in the main bay of the station. it looks very well almost completed. we're finishing our vehicle. this vehicle will take some of our mini pumpers or engines. so we're happy to get a new one there. we received a grant for four mini pumpers. and we have several already looking at different models that will work for us. we have twelve engines and contracts. five of them will be delivered this week. they come to us, we put in our performance center shops. so it takes a long time to get these engines and trucks built. we have to make sure they work

forrous in our hills and our areas. so we go through vigorous testing process and so we expect those five to be delivered this week. they have some additional equipment to be installed in them and the rest of them should be here by mid may. we still have seven trucks one of them is back to louisiana like i mentioned before, every apparatus that we purchase goes to test the first one. once we have those kinks worked out, then we plan it just like this one. we're on the first one now, we have some issues with it and now they're working and the manufacturer is coming down from louisiana to make the chassie into that. there was a protest, i believe we're working on that and it should be closed pretty soon too. just a difference depending on the one that lost the bed argued about the other one. we should be moving with that pretty soon too.

another boat that we're getting and the latest picture we go from that is close to completion as well and we do expect to see some tests up in seattle up in may and we're going up there to do that. so happy to get a new vessel in the fleet of the fire department. we have electric fans that are ordered. a little history on the fans that we have is we used to have gas powered fans to evacuate smoke and whatnot. so we've been slowly facing in electric fans. they do have very powerful fans that we can use. so now we have an order to outfit all of the trucks with electric fans. after a fire, we can evacuate some of the smoke for any of the structures visa these fans and we can wait to start the clean up of that so we don't expose our firefighters to

smoke when it's not needed. we're also purchasing new gear, safety gear that we have to get. so that's going there. we have received some rescue boats. surf has been a popular sport. but any manufacturer we tapped in to, they were back ordered and we have new chain saws, ventilation saws, currently expect to have those out very soon and get those out to our truck company. i'm going to talk about what chief o'connor's going to talk about. he'll speak about some of the projects especially the ones that were due in june to the board supervisors and studies. welcome that. all events continue to support the vaccination site at treasure island for other awhile, until the end of the month. our members keep going there.

we have a nice event where we did the event and also the chief painted that were just due and painted the golden hydrant. so that was a nice event and it was mentioned already, but thank you again, commissioner nakajo, it was important for us to expect how our systems work. it helps us immensely through this. that concludes my report. >> president: thank you. shall we first see any questions from the commissioners for chief velo before we move on to chief o'connor's report? >> secretary: and there's nobody on the public comment line. >> president: thank you. public comment will be closed and i see commissioner

>> our infrastructure is aging and i think we're starting to see some early signs of aging infrastructure and the need to start changing out some of these pipes.

i just approved having station 28 lateral redone. so we're trying to move on those and then, in those stations where we're seeing repeated backups where we've gone to monthly or quarterly snaking of these pipes, we'll send a camera down there and there was more than just grease, there was plaque build-up over time. again, it's just age. and during the pandemic, we had more wipes being used. there were wipes being flushed down. winter is probably our worst month. >> commissioner: okay. and you can probably answers the next one chief de witt and that's dealing with the hose tower at station 15 on ocean avenue. why did we select that one to be replaced as opposed to the rest of them being torn down? why'd we decide to keep that one? >> my understanding is that that fire station in particular, there's a mural on

it and they wanted to leave one hose tower that represented the history of the city. so basically the rest of the tear downs were contingent and to put up a new tower that's sizably safe. that's why that one goes down and up again. >> commissioner: so the hose tower at station 15 is supposed to be historic. >> i know there's a beautiful mural on it and perhaps that's why it's chosen. it's also on bedrock. it's also one of the smaller towers. the whole project and that was the one that was chosen. i don't have the why. >> commissioner: yeah. that was my question, chief dewitt is it historic? because it doesn't look historic to me, it was rather

new. so we're saving the new one and tearing down the historic one. that's just my comment. that's all my comments, madam president, at this moment. >> president: thank you, commissioner cleaveland. chief velo. >> it's historic from the 50s. >> president: like the rest of us. not you, but us. okay. >> [ laughter ]. >> president: all right. i'm sorry. commissioner nakajo. thank you for your patience. >> commissioner: thank you very much, madam president. thank you, chief velo. that was very comprehensive. it's amazing in terms of how much you can present in terms of information with all of the categoricals. i just wanted to ask two questions for you, chief velo.

i wanted to get a comment in terms of the airport with chief johnson in the sense of we know things are getting a little bit better. vaccines, etc.. i just want to be able to get briefed on what does the traffic look like at the airport and any kind of perception in terms of update, in terms of the commission and then i would like to add least hear from chief cahaja in terms of the transition going from the field to being the chief of the department. i just want to engage a little bit if you can indulge me. >> absolutely. chief johnson, go ahead. >> sure. good evening, commissioners, president finestein. command staff chief nicholson. commissioner, we are starting to see an uptick in passenger travel. as a matter of fact, they established a group of a stakeholders and every two

weeks we do have passenger recovery team that gets together. we're up -- prior to the pandemic, we were having about 80,000 to 90,000 passengers flying out per day. now we fell all the way to about 3,000 or 4,000 and now we're averaging about 20,000 and they expect a bump the middle of july. they're starting to bring back a lot of employees. trying to build back up. and it's expanding as it's starting to grow also construction's started back up. but the airport has been impacted. we're supposed to get two new fire houses the next couple of years. a lot of equipment a lot of things being deferred. they're going a lot of work on the runways and things like that. we are starting to see a lot of the vendors come back. restaurants and stores are opening back up also.

>> commissioner: chief. >> yes, sir. commissioner, you wanted to know the transition from the field to this position. i know you've been quite busy. >> yeah. it's quite an adjustment. in total, this is my 24th year in the fire service and all of that time has been in the fire house and on the apparatus and i love that, but i'm excited to be in this position. it is a it is busy so time flies. >> commissioner: thank you very much, chief, for indulging me. i have to admit this is the first time we're able to see you in your gold and settled. the first time i think was in the field and the second time was transitional and i just wanted to be able to hear your

voice. i'm just at a point of clarity because i'm conscious of it am i saying your last name correctly? can you tell me how you say it? >> yes, sir. it's kailoa. >> commissioner: kaialoa. >> that's it. >> president: thank you commissioner nakajo. i think you're muted vice president rodriguez. >> commissioner: a couple of questions. a few for i think it would be for dewitt one question to begin with. all these sewer backups and i'm not too clear on this. but the city has passed a bond years ago the p.u.c. i think,

it was money for sewer lines can we take advantage of that if our sewer lines. >> i honestly don't know the answer to that. i imagine it will be in the streets but i will certainly look into it and we'll take advantage of anything we're entitled too. but right now we're using dpw to replace those. i know it was a bond. >> commissioner: like millions of dollars for underground sewer lines. i would think that, you know, we should take advantage of it if we're entitled to some of that. >> i'll look into it now that you've mentioned it. >> commissioner: okay. and the other two parts i have i don't know if this is for

chief velo, i see two positions here. one was it was division of training and it's where the item is an ala quarterly meeting with the state fire training regarding sfi certification and and i've got one more question. >> correct. so what it says is the i credit accredited by the state. and firefighter 1 and firefighter 2 are the crick we are teaching are to be in line and when i explain the weeks that require, the training they're required to do, that's in line with the requirements

of the state fire marshal. so we have meetings and stakeholders for the state and especially academies that are accredited by the state. we go there. and in sacramento and now virtual to make sure any updates, changes that happens to those academies whether they move or add curriculum. so every academy we have, we have the most current training available for the state because they always keep changing things and trying to add more things. so our firefighters when they finish the academy are fully accredited by the state. >> commissioner: okay. thank you. and the last question i have is i also read where it said there was a captain position opening. it sounds like it would be division of support services for the ser bond and i understood that it would be like a temporary position that's funded by a grant for two years and then the captain,

whoever it was would be reassigned back into the field maybe or if there was additional funding they would maybe say. but my question is for other bond measures, is this the way it normally goes? are we just trying to take advantage of the funding that's there? >> i wouldn't say we're taking advantage of it, commissioner. i think the oversight that we want to have our members look into some of these major projects, we have an officer assigned to that. it's paid by partially the bond and the salary. it's just to have somebody that's going to be meetings oversight. checking on things that are going on. so having that officer that's dedicated to those projects, for us, we feel it's very important to have that. in this case, the captain that's there is going to retire in june and we're looking for a new captain or officer to apply for that position. and now that we have the training facility and other stations that are coming up in the pipeline.

we want to have continued oversight use with that. >> commissioner: good enough. thank you very much. >> president: question. yes, commissioner covington. >> commissioner: thank you, madam president. thank you for your report, chief velo. and i just wanted you to, if you can, refresh our memories on how much the grant for the hose tenders was. and the source of grant. >> so, for the hose tenders, there was one that was given to us by the state and two that were in the budget. we got a grant for mini pumpers. the mini pumper grant was for $700,000. so the grant for the hose

tender was actually one of them came from the state and two came from the budget. originally, we had five, if you recall, we had five in the budget and due to covid, all the departments in the city had to make some cuts and unfortunately, two were taken from us. our goal is to put them back in the budget. i think by doing this outreach to some of the local officials, they understand why we need that and we're hoping to see that in the budget up coming. >> commissioner: okay. so it was the mini pumpers. >> yeah. >> commissioner: okay. and, do you recall the amount? >> $700 thousand. >> commissioner: okay. i want to give a shout out to folks at the airport for getting a perfect test of results, 100% and that's

fantastic. could we find out a little bit more about that from the chief about the airport. >> yes, ma'am. it's our yearly annual inspections for the park 139 and it encompasses the entire airport. everything from the remaining records to the amount of paint on the runways. it's a week long inspection and the fire department has a large role in that in that the airport cannot maintain a certificate without an active fire department. we actually struggled from that early on. los angeles had theirs earlier this year, they had 20 efficiencies on theirs. so the airport is really happy about it, really psyched about it and, you know, waiting to do the same thing next year.

>> commissioner: before you go, can you talk a little bit about the proposed additional twota at least they were planning to put in a new terminal where they want to have that and they don't want folks driving on to the airfield private car. but i was in a meeting just the other day where that might be pushed back probably another five to ten years now just

because of the huge financial hit we took during covid even though the airport is getting a lot of funds under the recovery act that the president signed a few weeks ago, but still, a lot of it's being pushed back right now. >> commissioner: okay. >> they are doing some minor modifications to fire houses because of issues like mold and leaky roofs and stuff like that. >> commissioner: thank you for the update. i really encourage our new commissioners to visit the airport and since the airport pays for the majority of what it cost to have three fire stations at the airport, that is a tremendous help to us and the visitors to san francisco and, of course, those of us who are happy citizens of san francisco. so go out to the airport if you

get a chance. call first. [ laughter ] all right. thank you. questions. >> president: thank you, commissioner covington. any of the commissioners have any further questions? i'm not seeing any hands. i have one topic i'd like to bring up and i think i should direct it to you, chief velo, and it is with regard to station 35 which is the fire boat station. i guess assigned to peer 22.five. just one of the fire houses that sort of bobbles my mind. i have some concerns because it seems like we have been sort of hit a plaid meyer here or a stopping point here.

i was fortunate enough to just so where i'm looking at little squares here. commissioner nakajo doesn't think he's the only one. i was picked up by chief rubenstein on saturday and was taken on a tour. part of it included station 35 and i can't quite remember when that was, chief rubenstein, but it was a few weeks ago and it was, i mean, it's beautiful. it's in great shape. i first would like to ask you really in terms that i can understand, what is the problem with getting it done? i know it's a hook-up. i know it's a hook-up to electricity and am i correct in thinking that it's basically done except that it can't get bluged in basically, that there

isn't a power source for it or am i incorrect about that? >> you're pretty close. they're not quite done, but the finishing touches are being done right now. and you are correct, the main delay and let me just give you a little backup on the times that we had originally. the substantial completion date originally given to us was february 5th, 2021. the final completion was supposed to be march 18th, 2021. what we have right now is completion of august 19th and a final completion of september twenty-nineth. so we have six months or so delayed so far. now, every project has some delays because different things happen. this one in particular, the point of connection. the point where the grid connects to the fire station gives sufficient load to power the station and this station has not just, you know, we're charging the boats too and a lot of electrical issues that we have there. we get notified by d.p.w. last

year in july that there was an issue with this. this project started in 2017 and there was a building -- sorry, electrical engineer assigned to this project. basically, we gave this project to a company. came through and then the actual building on top and then moved here to the station. so this part of the process was done through that. at one point, the point of connection never connected and it was never addressed that it was not going to be enough at the point that was identified in the beginning of the process to begin at the station. what we have now is a different location that we identified. they're digging in the ground now to get that connection going and get enough power to the station. so it's frustrating to us because we should have been there already and we understand that.

basically because d.p.w. pu.c. and this contractor. we're trying to figure out where the ball was dropped but it was dropped and six months now it's going to be delayed on this project. and it's unfortunate. >> president: let me ask you this. it is unfortunate, is it costing the department any money because we've got a six-month delay that i don't think it appears was caused by anything the department did do or didn't do? >> it is costing us money. what i would say is if it had been addressed in the beginning of the project, there would still be some cost to it. >> president: of course. >> so we have to figure out how much the cost would have been how to address it in the beginning and to properly compared to what it's costing us to do an extension. it could have been that same connection that we have fund now and we're doing now. but there is additional studies, management from d.p.w.

that's going to cost us. every time the project is delayed there's management costs. what it does for us. some of the projects that we are in desperate needs for now is not addressed here. that's our concern as well too. >> president: so is what you're saying is that the fire department is bearing the cost of i will not use it in a legal sense, but a negligent design or a design that did not foresee that this station was going to need the power it was going to need where it was going to need it and that therefore it can't be hooked up as was initially designed. is that a correct statement? >> there was definitely a miss. i would say one thing is that the contractor is not getting paid as this project is not in

the completion. because they have a penalty for no payment once the date has passed. they're fighting amongst themselves whose fault and somebody missed the point of connection, the sign from the electrical engineer point of view. >> president: all right. and, just so i'm, you know, still learning this stuff, is the department of public works the project manager? >> that is correct. we have assigned a team that assists us with the project management of any project we do. >> president: and, are you obligated to use a project manager from the department of public works? >> according to the charter we are. there might be exceptions to legal means that can be excluded, but most of the cases, we are.

>> yes. they have rates. >> president: and then does d.p.w. pay the liquidated damages for the towardiness and failing to miss the completion date by six months? [p

and management fees and all these -- these fees. and they're -- they're messing up. i mean, if i were to point a finger, i mean, if somebody didn't catch this. and that's what i'm trying to say. they can all point fingers at each other, but this is just eating into the bond money that should be dedicated to station 16. or replumbing the station commission cleaveland brought up, or whatever we need to do. you know, the bond money isn't going to be there forever. and to the extent we're eating through it because of negligent delay, this is not a service to the taxpayers. and it just obviously rattles me a bit. if i'm wrong, please correct me. and i speak -- sorry, commissioner rodriguez, i do see

your hand. let me get that out, though. >> so real quick, what you said is true. you know, it goes wages in the bay area, they're getting paid in the bay area. so it's going to be a lot higher than say bakersfield or whatever. the other part about it and we talked some about this. of how, you know, the fire department really should be able to have their own staff that works on their building, because 50 buildings is a lot of buildings. but i was talking to the head of another union in san francisco today and i mentioned to him what the cost that d.p.w. is charging per member. so, let's say i make 160 -- or $190,000 a year, right? that's going to include my wages

and my health and welfare and my, you know, benefits. so, when the cost -- say, $190 thousand, you would think, at least i did, the work is not being done privately. it's public work. it's for the city. then why are they making so much money? i think they quoted maybe close to $400,000 a year per worker. and to me, that's really bad. i think when you work with people, you have to kind of -- not expose them for what they are in public, because you're going to ruin a working relationship forever, but i

really think even the labor business managers of some of the unions here in the city i talked to regarding this, said, yeah, this problem has been going on forever and the unions have complained, because sheet metal, plumbing, carpenters, their union members work for the city under city contracts. so the unions know what their members make. and they know what d.p.w. would have to pay those members. it's atrocious that they would almost double the -- the wages of the works for a department that is in the city. >> well, i mean, i really agree with you, commissioner rodriguez. and i just happened to look up because we have had plumbing problems. we all know we've had plumbing problems. some of it is age. some of it is maybe things that

just occur in life at the station. but the prevailing wage for a union plumber in san francisco is $121.05 an hour. if you multiply that -- which mr. corso would do much quicker than i can -- but if i do it, say they work 40 hours a week, not counting overtime or double time, 40 hours a week, 52 weeks a year. they never go on vacation. you're looking at $258,000 per year. not $400,000 a year. i want to be clear here we're sucking up bond money, which is a detriment to the citizenry, or sucking up department money which is a detriment to the

i believe it was close to $400,000 for station 16. and we were told that, no, d.p.w. would -- that money, because they spent it on management fees. >> yes. i remember that conversation well. and, so, i do share the frustration on the part of the chief and her command staff, as well as my fellow commissioners. we just need to figure out how to correct this, because this is

unfair and unjust. that's all i have to say. >> thank you. >> commissioner cleaveland: president, i am -- i think it's very ironic, quite frankly, that the department of public works was put in charge of managing all the construction projects and the maintenance projects in the city so there wouldn't be any corruption. getting their buddies to do the plumbing jobs at the fire stations that need it. and here we are with the public works department. so it's ironic their management of our processes is costing us such a huge markup, quite frankly. and if those same dollars were

given directly to the fire department to manage our own maintenance, i bet you we could get a lot more value out of every dollar from those bonds, as well as from our general fund every year. so that's my only comment. it's very ironic. and i would like to see us as a commission look into what it would take to make those changes. i would like to see the language that says we have to use public works to manage all of the construction projects. i'd like to see the language. and perhaps pass a resolution urging changes in that. >> president feinstein: thank you, commissioner cleaveland. i agree with you 100%. that i think that as leaders, that's what our job is. and this is just appalling to

me. just appalling. so, further comments? maureen, i can't -- i'm so busy being appalled, i can't remember if we did public comment or not. >> we did call for public comment. >> president feinstein: all right, thank you very much. i'm going to then move along. and thank you, chief o'con, er, for your patience. i'm sorry, forgive me. >> we are all set to begin? >> we are all set and you have the ball. >> all right, let's see if we can do this. all right, good evening, president, vice president, commissioners, chief, i'm assistant deputy chief tom

o'connor and i'm honored to give this presentation. i'm going to start in 1906, but don't panic, i'll get to 2021 very quickly. so the 1906 earthquake put to rest the debate over the construction of the emergency fire-fighting water system. originally pleaded for by the chief sullivan, who ironically enough was to die during the earthquake and never see his system be built. but he advocated for a dedicated emergency firefighter water system for years and years and years. and that's a loss of over 28 builds, 300 san franciscans, the chief saw it finally become realized. in 1908, san francisco approved a bond for -- very briefly, you

have the core facilities. you have the reservoir holding 10.5 million gallons. the jones street tank. station 1, here at headquarters, down in the basement, pump station 2, we foot of the van ness, which can pump 10,000 gallons per minute. we have 135 miles of pipe. 1600 high pressure hydrants. 229 cisterns. and five manifolds for our fire boat. so, the original a.w.s.s. or auxiliary water supply system, you'll hear interchangeable

terms. a.w.s.s. and there is also e.f.w.s., the emergency fire-fighting water system. which is a all of them together. it was transferred to the puc and they conducted an initial assessment and found that only 40% of san francisco had the reliable enough water supply to fight fire generated after a 7.8 earthquake. if you could see on the map, i'm not sure if it's big enough. but the light blue areas in the western and southern neighborhoods, they had the lowest scores, meaning they're not served by the a.w.s.s. system out there and they serve coverage in these neighborhoods. this is when bonds used to be issued to improve and strengthen

our system. there is also research demonstrating the vulnerabilities of urban areas to fire following earthquake. the greatest issue is a failure of water supply systems in post earthquake suppression activities. with every earthquake, you have x number of ignitions, whether it's chemical, gas, or electrical. and you're going to y number of water main breaks. it's this intersection of x and y where you have the greatest problems post earthquake. and certain researchers, dr. hawthorne, have noted that planning emergencies together have been incomplete. in 2011 study, he called for a greater liaison between fire departments and water departments.

so we kind of looked back at this paper in 2011, the birth of the puc and the liaison position where water departments and fire departments are viewed as coequal in the fire-fighting activity, because the best fire-fighting is going to worthless without water at hand. the duties and responsibilities of the liaison is to oversee and facilitate all efforts related to the puc management. the water supply system. to coordinate all puc in expansion of the a.w.s.s. system. to manage the portable water supply. lead strategic planning efforts. and representing the department at meetings and community events. now the shared goal of the puc and the fire department obviously is to improve and expand our water supply system.

so in 2010, added additional $54 million to the efforts ecertificate. we have 6 pipeline an tunnel projects completed. seismic upgrades that are almost completed at pump station 2. it's capable to feed lake into a future a.w.s.s. system. and we have university mound reservoir connection to the a.w.s.s. system. now, in 2018 and 2019, there was a grand jury report entitled act

now before it's too late, expand our high pressure emergency fire-fighting water system. they found despite the improvements of 2010 and 2014, there were still very large swaths of san francisco that were without adequate water supply in the event of a disaster or earthquake. in the civil grand jury made the following recommendations. they want to address water systems throughout san francisco. as interim measure, they called for purchasing 20 water supply vehicles. they wanted the city to conduct research on the west side of san francisco. they want us to present a more detailed analysis of the emergency fire-fighting water system needs, so a water demand analysis done on a block by block basis. originally, there were reports done in 2014 and 2018 that looked at the city through fire response areas. or they followed the first alarm

areas of firehouses. and they did analysis of water demand after an earthquake for every first alarm area, but the grand jury wanted that broken down for a more granular look at how much water we do need in event of a disaster. they called for a full plan to be presented to the board of supervisors for the emergency fire-fighting water system by december 31st of this year. and they refugee -- requested that the budget and legislative analyst review. eser 2020 was a response to the civil grand jury. the board of supervisors put the bond on the ballot. and the bond passed overwhelmingly with $623.5 million in funding. and the specific projects for this bond were west side,

potable emergency fire-fighting system, a manifold and as i stated early, a salt water pump station analysis with the feasibility of building a pump station on the west side of san francisco. the biggest component of the bond obviously is the west side -- madame president -- the potable emergency fire-fighting water system. this is a hybrid solution to the original solution. it was designed to meet the robust standards that the fire department had. but it's going to utilize the same or better earthquake resistant pipes. on the right, it's earthquake resistant pipe. it's a flexible iron pipe used in japan for many years and its

withstood earthquakes of 8.0 on the richter scale. we're going to build a better, faster stronger in the richmond and sunset districts. and the potable emergency fire-fighting water system has two main benefits. number one, it's going to give us that high pressure water supply we need. but it's also going to supply an additional source of drinking water after a disaster. so, the water main breakage that i was talking about earlier post earthquake, they're going to leave large portions of san francisco without water, but with this new pipeline in the neighborhoods, this will be a secondary source of water to help during the recovery and rebuilding phase after an earthquake. as you can see in the diagram, this is from the budget and legislative analyst report. the alignment for the west side is going to run from lake merced

pump station up to the yellow piping into the red zone, into the sunset district, up through the park and then into the richmond. and it will actually stop up around this region of the richmond as phase one. and that's phase 2 will bring it back in the loop past sunset and back to lake merced. so there are two phases for this new rollout. but the first phase is funded by the eser 2020 bond. this also has four connections to water sources at two locations. we have lake merced pump station which generates 30 million gallons per minute. and then the hetch hetchy. and lake merced, we can pull water out of the lake that holds 1.2 to 2 billion gallons. and we have a feed from sunset reservoir with a feed from north basin and the hetch hetchy

regional water supply. during the up coming projects with the eser 2020 bond, we have the completion of the study that has to be presented to the board of supervisors by june 30th of this year. we have the completion of the neighborhood detailed analysis, again by june 30th of this year. we have to develop a comprehensive city-wide plan by december 31 of this year. and that will analyze whether the board of supervisors want to present another separate eser bond just solely for the a.w.s.s. system as well as securing additional post tenders to bridge the gap until we get the full up and running. i included a map from one of the draft. this broke san francisco down into five regions for the salt water pump station study.

we have the southern dunes. you have the rocky area south to china beach. then you have the rocky north. then the north bay front from port point to pier 23. and then the east bay front. and each of these areas present, you know, geological and engineering challenges to set up another salt water pump station. but the most challenging aspect of that study is the intersection of all these areas run into so many different regulatory bodies, that it could take years and years to get the permitting necessary to build them. and i can give you a brief run down on some of them. there is the california coastal condition, bay conservation development commission, california land commission, regional water control board, fisheries and i could go on down the list.

it's a confluence of so many regulatory bodies, i think that will be our greatest challenge with the salt water pump station. nothing insurmountable, but it's down the road quite a bit because of the challenges. we have all the reports due in june and december this year. we took it on ourselves to begin the drills. we've had an exercise at pump station 1 here, with the puc and the sfd performed together. we did a demonstration of district 11 for supervisor safai. we did another host demonstration this saturday which was attended by wheelchair nicholson, and chief finkelstein. tomorrow morning at 9:00, we have a tabletop exercise with the puc simulating an earthquake and working on our disaster protocols. and we're working on setting up

security demonstration city-wide for awful the supervisors to show our strengths and weaknesses we have in different districts. we can show them the strengths in district 1 and 3. and the lack of resources in 11, 10, 4, 7. we really want to have the decision-makers be comfortable with what we're presenting and what we need moving forward. i've been lucky in this position that i'm working with a lot of agencies that are planning so far ahead. we're looking at eser -- a.w.s.s. in 2040, 2050. and trying to map out the growth of san francisco and where we need to build this system so we don't get into another situation like pre-1906 where we're saying we need to build it out. we're building it out prior to the disaster that will be coming our way. so that in a nutshell is the roles and responsibilities and

duties of the puc liaison. and i can answer any and all questions you may have. maureen, do i take it away? >> there is nobody on the public comment link? >> president feinstein: thank you, madame secretary. public comment is therefore closed. and as soon as -- i can see everybody again. questions or comments from the commissioners? commissioner cleaveland? >> commissioner cleaveland: madame president, and thank you chief o'connor. great report. great update. we have needed this for some time. and i had a quick question. and that is do you think we'll be able to have that comprehensive city-wide plan done by december 31st of this year? >> absolutely. we're already working on estimates for the distance between hydrants right now and pipe overlays in the richmond

and the hunter point area. and trying to give a robust presentation to supervisors to show what we need and need to do. i'm confident it will be done. it's in the early initial draft stages, but i think by december 31st it shouldn't be a problem at all. >> commissioner cleaveland: once we have the report, we can go to city hall and say we need a special eser bond just for the auxiliary water system upgrade, correct? >> exactly. exactly, commissioner. >> commissioner cleaveland: thank you. thank you, madame president. >> president feinstein: thank you. any further comments from any commissioners? commissioner nakajo. >> commissioner nakajo: thank you very much, madame president. thank you. that was a comprehensive report totally. i wanted to ask basic questions and before i ask my two

questions, one of them i think you delivered it in the sense of how this would be financed. and i heard commissioner cleaveland talk about the eser bond. one of my questions was a projection of what it's going to cost in terms of expense to produce this overall. i think you answered my question as to when you think this would be completed. i'm talking about the complete system. and i'm not sure my notes look like 2050. can you address both of them? but first, can you address, if you think you need to, i didn't hear -- unless i missed it -- the description of clean water versus salt water. and how that plays between the truck systems and pumping systems. i asked that because i think

part of the report was the information on how much it would cost to do a pump station that used salt water. so i just wanted to be able to get clarity, is the system set up to use two levels of water resource? clean as well as salt? and i'll stop there, chief. >> sure, commissioner. so our current system, the a.w.s.s. is cleared to use both fresh and salt. the salt is used to as a last ditch attempt if the tanks are drained. we can pump into the system through 1 or 2. and introduce salt water to the system. that's the backup to the backup. when we look at the new potable in the richmond and sunset district. it's a dual use system, it's for fire-fighting needs and a

secondary source of drinking water. you would only introduce water from lake merced under an emergency order if this was the conservation of unimaginable proportions. but to have the ability to introduce it in the system, you have to flush it out again, issue a boil water order. then work on the salt water pump station, but in the interim, there is the capability to introduce lake merced into the system for the richmond and sunset districts. i can't a fire big enough we couldn't put it out with lake merced, but we do have that capability. >> commissioner nakajo: i think that answers my question, because part of this was clearing up for me that there was information presented to me

that said that clean water through the system is a good system compared to if we needed to use salt water, there is a system. but there was some discussion that our pipes -- our hoses would be compromised once we used salt water. and i didn't know if that was compatible with our system. and if we did use it, i heard you say, we have to flush our equipment. and to me, that takes time. unless there is a system that takes in salt, flushing it out and gets it into clean. chief, is that anything you else you want to share with me on that -- or us? >> i hear you, commissioner. it would take time, but this is backup to the backup. we really had a bigger ahead of

us. it's to be prepared for the worst of the worst. in 1989, it was the backup to the backup, to the backup. the fire boat with the hose tender. so we want plays in our playbook available. >> commissioner nakajo: okay. one more question, chief. you talked about the eser bond financing this. is that correct? and then what kind of dollar figure are we talking about with this eser bond? i'm just curious in terms of that. and did you confirm that this might be complete by 2050? that sounds way out there. >> we're putting together a variety of options for the board of supervisors, what we hope to look like in 2030 and 2040, between the bond measures being put out now.

once the final design is conceptualized, then it's costed out. then we say, here's the cadillac, the buick and the mitsubishi model. which one will the voters go for? part of the demonstration is to have the supervisors be familiar with our disaster preparedness and what the costs will be. generally speaking, the reception has been fantastic so far because it's nice to talk to the decision-makers in a casual atmosphere and let them see the equipment we have. let them meet the members, the chief and the command staff. and yourself, commissioner, it was great you came out. it shows the importance of disaster preparedness and to impress upon them what we need to do going forward. >> commissioner nakajo: one last piece. at one point i served in the commission and that grand jury finding in terms of the reference that you made, it was

there that i served. this has been a long subject matter as your presentation indicated. that grand jury, i'll use the term kind of kicked me in the behind to kind of accelerate. and being a person in san francisco that experienced -- one of the questions was where were you? because it was a lifetime experience with that. for myself speaking. but i couldn't imagine if -- went up and there wasn't a system that we could deal with in terms of basically putting it out. thank you very much, chief, i appreciate your information. madame president, thank you. >> president feinstein: thank you, commissioner nakajo. chief nicholson? >> chief o'connor, do you know how many days of fire-fighting for these water sources would

run out? do we have any sort of estimates on that? i feel like there was some talk of it, but it has escaped my brain. >> there is a variety of modelling going on with the water demand study. so, what it's contingent upon, and thinks the work of dr. hawthorne, he estimates it will be 90-100 ignitions. you the of those 90-100, 20 can be put out by citizens. this is where i feel mucky. you have the ignition and then the discovery by the citizen and then there is the reporting phase. which is the third part of the equation. the reporting phase is the most difficult, because communications will be down. phone lines will be jammed. so getting the fire reported and as we all know fire grows exponentially, that's the biggest sort of unknown variable as to how big the fires will

grow. then there is response. and then there is suppression. so some of the fires will be held to content. some will be a fifth alarm. so it's all -- it's all -- there are estimates from 24 to 72 hours and the other unknown variable of how many water main breaks there may be and how many failures of the a.w.s.s., the old system. so there will be a range of answers on the water demand needs before that comes out and we're still kind of working the variables on that. we're can looking at a host of issues for the report and the draft, and we don't know as to how many gallons of water yet. we have rough estimate. and we don't know how many hours to put the fire out. i guess long winded way of saying i'm not sure, but it will

take a lot of time and a lot of water. >> thank you, perfectly clear. [laughter] >> other questions? from any other commissioners? commissioner covington? >> i don't have a question so much as a comment. and that is when we found out that the civil grand jury was going to be looking into what they considered deficiencies, we really did not know what that meant. and when the report came out, it was tremendously informative. and it really help bolster the department's assertions that there are certain things that need to be done and money has to be put behind those things.

so, the grand jury report, the civil grand jury report, was extremely helpful to us. in terms of getting the focus where it should be, which is what do we do next to prepare? so, i thank the grand jury because they're like us, they're citizen volunteers. they're not paid for doing this research. and talking to people. and formulating some ideas. so, it really is good. and our headquarters of the pump station as well. which is also very nice to know that headquarters has a very, very good chance of surviving. whatever comes. all right, thank you. >> thank you. further questions?

i see none. thank you. chief o'connor, very, very informative and you're right, i'm still learning the acronyms. and i'm getting better. but i really appreciate it. thank you very much. and i know the other commissioners do as well. anybody else? okay. madame secretary? >> no public comment. >> president feinstein: all right. public comment is closed. thank you. >> item 5, commission report. report on commission activities since last meeting of april 14, 2021. >> we know commissioner nakajo has been very, very busy. he's been all over the place. anything you'd like to add,

commissioner nakajo? >> commissioner nakajo: ask questions about how things are as they roll out. i'm cautious to -- [indiscernible] -- my -- [indiscernible] [indiscernible] -- be there in an official capacity was great. >> president feinstein: i think there is something the matter with your audio. we're only getting every other word. is anybody else having trouble hearing? >> yes. i thought it was just me. >> i'll conclude. that's all i need to say.

>> oh. commissioner cleaveland. >> commissioner cleaveland: i have the pleasure of having a meeting with the leaders of the guardians of the city this past month. a couple of weeks ago actually. with james lee, paul berry and dave eberle. and they -- i think we need to invite them to come and be -- make a presentation to our commission at some future date. they've been working on a strategic plan and they should have that finished shortly. i did discuss the meeting i had with them, with the chief following that. and passed on the suggestions that they would to see a representative. it's been one of those things, they haven't had a representative from the fire department on the gotc board, which is the non-profit organization that represents the fire department, the police department and the sheriff's department in terms of their

historical vehicles and apparatuses and maintains really the history of our department and the other two departments as well. both of those departments, other departments, have representatives who regularly attend and participate and speak on behalf of their departments as these g.o.t.c. meetings. and we desperately need to have representation from the fire department on the g.o.t.c. board. so i would like to see that happen. and hopefully that can happen as soon as possible through the appropriate channels. there is also a need for outreach to the members. the 1800 or so members of the fire department, how many of our members of the fire department even know what g.o.t.c. stands for. or do they know much about the history of the fire department? do they know much about the effort to preserve and restore

the historic vehicles and apparatuses that we have -- that we still have? and then lastly, they requested that the monies from the willman fund, that is under our direction as the commission, that they requested that the balance of the willman fund be transferred to the g.o.t.c. so that's something further for us as a commission to consider at some future date. that's all i have to report. thank you, madame president. >> president feinstein: thank you, commissioner cleaveland. any further comments? reports? all right. madame secretary. >> there is nobody on the public comment line. >> president feinstein: public comment shall be closed. >> item 6. agenda for next and future fire commission meetings.

discussion regarding agenda for next and future fire commission meetings. >> president feinstein: requests? commissioners? yes, commissioner cleaveland? >> commissioner cleaveland: i would like this reiterate my interest in having the g.o.t.c. put on a future agenda. not necessarily next week or even next month. but when they are ready, i'd like to have them on the agenda to present more than just where they are today, but where they've come are from and a -- from and a little history of the organization so that the general membership and the fire department can learn the importance of g.o.t.c. and learn a little bit about the history and the general public would have an opportunity to learn a little bit about how they can become involved in helping to preserve our fire department's history.

so, that's it. >> president feinstein: anybody else? >> vice president rodriguez: this is for chief o'connor. thank you for your report. i've been wondering where this was going to go eventually. obviously, there is such a big need for this. when you talked about a salt water, would that be like a duplicate of what you have at the end of van ness street? >> no, that was built in a different time and era where permitting wasn't as important. so open water intake like that is subject to a lot more scrutiny now. so i don't think it would be along the same vein, but something similar to that. it all depends on where you put

it. the open water one can be cheaper because you can get closer to the pipeline, but there are more regulatory agencies and permitting fees are higher. it's a slant well, where you dig down under the coast and into the sandy layer of the ocean so there is less wildlife restrictions. but you have a longer pipe are-run to get out there. they all present challenges, but no, we don't build one similar to the two-pump stations we have now, because they're grandfathered in from the early 1900s where there were less agencies looking over it. >> thank you. >> president feinstein: yes, commission covington? >> i wonder, madame secretary, do you have a list of topics that have been presented previously? >> well, i have suggestions. i have nothing set in stone for the next meeting or the future.

but we have cost recovery for surf, cliff and bay rescues. slow street. and an update from chief on division of training and status on current academy class. >> okay. i think we have slow streets and also what are the spaces? you know -- >> shared spaces. >> shared spaces, yes. it was also on that. on this, i believe. unless they're two different things. i don't have anything to suggest. i was just wondering what was out there that we have expressed interest in and getting more information about. >> any further suggestions from

the commissioners? or command staff? all right. >> there is nobody on the public comment line. >> president feinstein: very good. public comment is closed. thank you. >> item 7, adjournment. >> i move that we adjourn. >> i second. >> president feinstein: vote to adjourn. >> vice president rodriguez: aye. >> commissioner nakajo: i affirm. thank you. this meeting is adjourned at 6:53. >> thank you. >> thank you, everyone. >> thank you.

i'm nicole and lindsey, i like the fresh air. when we sign up, it's always so gratifying. we want to be here. so i'm very excite ied to be here today. >> your volunteerism is appreciated most definitely.

>> last year we were able to do 6,000 hours volunteering. without that we can't survive. volunteering is really important because we can't do this. it's important to understand and a concept of learning how to take care of this park. we have almost a 160 acres in the district 10 area. >> it's fun to come out here. >> we have a park. it's better to take some of the stuff off the fences so people can look at the park.

>> the street, every time, our friends. >> i think everybody should give back. we are very fortunate. we are successful with the company and it's time to give back. it's a great place for us. the weather is nice. no rain. beautiful san francisco. >> it's a great way to be able to have fun and give back and walk away with a great feeling. for more opportunities we have volunteering every single day of the week. get in touch with the parks and recreation center so come

>> this is the regular meeting of the small business commission held on april 26, 2021. the meeting is being called to order at 44 7:00 p.m. the small business commission thanks media services and sfgovtv for tele vicing the meeting, which can be viewed live or live streamed at sfgovtv.org. for the viewing public, we did have a glitch. there is a new call in line or new pass code. members who call in the phone number is the same. 415-655-0001. the new