of their building. the building is much better off with three open sides. i would be happy to go through a lot more. we have given you a complete set metal. we have our own and architect and engineers here to answer questions. i urge you to deny the appeal and allow us to submit our plans. we will see what we can do to continue to engineer our building. thank you. >> from what has been submitted, it is now reduced by 3 feet. is that correct, in terms of the encroachment? >> what i am saying is i am pretty certain that we can reduce the pop out mechanical element by 3 feet in each direction. i am not asking you to approve anything or to change the permits that we have. i think we are going to do that anyway. we may be able to do more when we finished engineering the building. vice president garcia: in some instances, if you were to do that, could you produce the encroachment to a foot and a half? >> due to the size of the pop out, up 4.5 feet. >> would -- which would reduce the encroachment down to 1.5 f

for a building after 1906. here's a building permit and you can get these by filling out one of those little forms we have over there. micro film records request. right, alan? and you take it to the accounter and say, here's what i would say -- i want to see every record available for my building including the permits, the plans, the job cards because that's where the inspectors sign off on and what else do we have over there. >> well, basically we have building permit applications or job cards or jobs done by district inspectors department to say it's final or not finaled with an expired job card and, plumbing, electrical permits. >> how come -- i thought we didn't. >> we do have some and miscallaneous documents and letters where people sent to the city and documents tham come through another department before us. now, what we don't have and we have building plans let me say buildings -- most wood frame houses residentials don't have plans in my recollection but commercial buildings almost always there's some

the building is already above us. we will be perfectly fine in this building was set back properly and actually what higher. it would not be that tall, but it would be taller. again, they have chosen not to do this because they do not like the economics of that building, so we're being asked to bear the brunt, and as was said, on four or five occasions it is not the back of our building, and it is right in our face, in approaching 7.5 to 8 feet into a 15 foot setback. the requirements are to set it back, it is encroaching even more. s so they just did not designed to be nice. they have designed this very carefully to take the vantage of every square foot -- take advantage of every square foot. that is a recorded document. i think he said it was not a record and document and that they did not have to worry about it. it is a recorded document. if you read this document, that has been a concern from day one. that is back when it was constructed. the concern was this 19 dozen square foot sort of orphan parcel, if you're g

commercial buildings and residential buildings . so what are the requirements for a commercial building? we break them down into two major classes. mid-sized commercial, midsized is 5000 to 25,000 square feet. and we have another category here which is large commercial, over 25,000 square feet. ok. what about smaller buildings, less than 5000 square feet? are they covered? no. they are not. they are apt to be covered in the future in some way, but they are not. the midsized is for new mid-size buildings, and this is for new large commercial, over 25,000 square feet. all high-rises. not that big a building in san francisco for commercial. this applies to certain classifications. b, m are the two main classifications. b is a business. any kind of business occupancy. m is work. places where you sell things -- mercantile. there are places that are not covered. institutions, hospitals, and schools are not covered. certain types of assembly occupancies are not covered. i think that they might be covered. and part of the reason that these

unreinforced masonry building. safe building or not such a safe building? not safe at all. you have deep set windows, arched windows, metal plate, then we can work. weak morter, what is that? brick on top of brick on top of brick. there's an ample of the header row, you see how they are turned perpendicular to each other, you can see the header rows in this one, see the brick going the other way about every 5 or 7 rows. deep set windows. here's a close up of one of those plates. a parapet wall is a clue that this building is an unreinforced building. which direction can that building go? right back out. this building, brick or wood? what are some of the clues? okay, what are the windows? they are deep set. there's a clue right there. deep set. deep set window, unreinforced masonry. can you see the metal plates? there is a metal plate right over there in the corner, there's another one over there. hard to see. also has a parapet on it. deep set windows. even though it has stucco on it, don't be fooled that that's wood up above. it's all brick because it's deep set windows. h

units, the soft story buildings. another was the three and four- unit buildings. there is a question of sympathy for the people that are more likely on those units in buildings. we assume that they are going to be a little less capable of bearing the burden of the cost on their building. that type of thought process went through here. there were substantial problems with the funds. it was very attractive to the low and very low and come projects. there is a lot of money that was not used in that. i think the city's controller's office has indicated it is a huge amount of money. $260 million? something on the order of $260 million of the allocation went unused. but the city comptroller's mention they will be very uncomfortable. that would be allocated to the seismic retrofit programs. >> my question is for future financing programs, how do we make it more attractive to people want to use it? and does of bureaucratic as possible? and the issue about the store's? >> many of the soft story buildings have garages on the g

this building card. most clerks when you approach them and ask for that they will send you to a computer monitor so to see what they have on-line. stand firm. you want to see the source document. they'll do it if you push them to do it. >> okay. couple more resources here. >> when you find out the people that used to live in your building, you can then go to the san francisco directories and their available that public libraries and they have many many years worth of these and you can find out that lawrence fox was married to betty who was a stockbroker and presided at 42 pacific avenue. you can find out if the owner was also occupying the building they owned so you can start to build a biography of the people that lived in your house through these city directors. >> i wanted to mention the building department has miscallaneous records of all sorts and let me just, a lon the length of letting you into the inner city secrets of records being kept. this is the unreenforced masonry building survey. we have

buildings fit more reasonably in these larger complex buildings. so you get to choose. the standard is, in 2010, right now it is certified, a minimum of 50. plus special requirements, and in 2010, it is green point rated with 75 points. and special requirements are with production, storm water management, and reduction. so we tried to keep it as simple as we could, simple categories for residential. we have not seen it too many problems yet. we have had a whole lot come in, as you can imagine, providing paperwork. we will talk about paperwork in a second. we have new commercial, new residential, and one more category. it says a new large commercial interior or major alteration to existing buildings with b m and r occupancies with more than 25 a square feet. basically, we're saying, there are two things. either the first kind of improvements in a building, or some other kind of alteration. first time improvements have to make reading requirements, being certified. when you look to achieve a lead rating for commercial improvements, you do not try to

if there is a building involved. what is your role? >> i am interested in the physical properties of the earth and how the earth will behave: subject to different load changes. when you are building a building, you are applying a load and you are wondering if the earth will be able to supply that load. we work closely together and we come up with practical engineering solutions. >> this is when someone wants to build something. also, we have a rock piece of land. we have to have a resolution. >> in the u.s., about 2/3 of the population lives in areas that are prone to landslides. about $2 billion of damage occurs annually from landslides. unfortunately, 20-25 million people die as a result of landslides o. >> much of the coastline is either a bright red or a beige print th. >> here we are at the base of telegraph hill on lombard street. this is owned by the city. behind you is a large piece of something exposed. you are looking at a large class that was xextricated in a quarry about hundred years ago. this is a secre

this is the department of building inspection brown bag lunch series at the department of building inspection. i am the chief inspectionor and we're looking at a interesting topic today which is commercial signs in san francisco. everybody has a point of view. some people love them. some hate them. they have a meaning and an important part to play, so it will be a fun tour, and i have signs to show you and use as a base of discussion and westbou e your questions. we have two quests introduce. jeanine pab pabilsky and she's an artist and a cultural historian and the founder of "bureau of urban secrets". >> it was found #- founded in 2g the dot com boom and engage artists and helping us interpret the city and we have done about 25 art projects in the city, and the most recent project is still on going and historically document the experience of the statutes of jaun bastila and king carter of the third and founding of san francisco and then homeless and upcoming we have a project of landsend. >> artistic intervention. i love that phrase and we have scott sanchez from the planning department who

[applause] we will build your trans bay terminal. we will build your branch. we will seismically retrofit your fire houses. we will build this playground. why? because of this legislation. what it means to us -- it directly affects us. we now have a better chance of getting a job. there's light at the end of the tunnel for us. each year -- excuse me. 20% of every city funded project, 20% has to be filled with san francisco residents. each year, that goes up by 5%. by 2017, every project funded by san francisco -- 50% of them will be san francisco residents. we will build a future san francisco. this is san francisco's future. why? because we are residents of san francisco. we are proud to be from the city by the bay. we are city build and that is what we do. [applause] >> thank you, michael. any questions? >> you mentioned the central subway project. there's been a lot of data on whether the local hiring ordinance will apply to that project. can you explain how we can get locals to work on the project? >> good afternoon. i'm the executive director of the san f

buildings. this is a very radical change for this block. there's no housing there now. and to put 50 units -- and this building, it's not going to be just 55 feet tall. it's going to be close to 70 feet tall as you come down the very steep slope on sutter. and so we're asking for -- and the impacts are obvious. people are saying what are the impacts? the shadow, the athetic, the impacts are overwhelming to plug this building in this small neighborhood and it's absurd to claim they've given back anything. they're going 100% over the current zoning. there's no rear yard for these people to live next to it. i mean, we started at 100 units and now down to 50. come on. there's only 28 under the zoning there. you know, the compromise that's been offered is not something i think the neighbors like. it's something i think they're willing to swallow for a good cause. >> thank you. >> president olague, commissioners, my name is sam kadavac, a member of the district and head of drew school which is four bl

we did not cover buildings under by the city. recovered some affordable housing, but i am not exactly sure how much was covered in the analysis. >> i would assume that it is not in the analysis. dr. lee did not analyze government buildings or infrastructure. it comes to reject from damage to privately owned buildings. >> if i might add to that. through the capital planning committee, we are embarking on a similar the valuation process of city-owned buildings. with respect to the housing authority, that is not city- owned either. but we are working closely with them on the rebuilding that you mentioned. it would address safety issues. for those not slated to go through that process, we can look at conducting that kind of evaluation. a lot of affordable housing is privately owned. that was proposition a that failed. that was trying to get public money to help those privately owned, but serving a very key public purpose. >> which organization? >> it is updating the evaluation we haven't done half of the earthquake in the 90's. >> we

buildings that fit in very nicely with the older buildings. they fit in extremely well and i think that is important that that is kept in mind and that we don't do everything the same which was a mistake in the past. >> it might be useful to pull that report. you look at chestnut street or poultry, there are four coffeeshops. the need to look at what has worked in various commercial strips to figure it out the saturation point. there are a couple of restaurants that are kind of local but this is mostly forma retail. the shopping center concept rain troop and the types of uses in the strip. this is not releasing successful for small businesses which is one of the reasons why i feel ok with it rather than at this site. >> i think that our market is fairly simple. this is trying to take art deco and put it into one building. for me, this does not work. a little simplification i don't mind references to art deco. this is a block away. the rest of the shopping centers are fairly clean. something would help, i'm not speaking against good design. a l

some say what you are allowed to build. the building and fire department tell you how to build it. if you want to open a restaurant here in 1660 mission street. we have john's restaurant down stairs. say you want todd remodel it you have to go to planning and say, are we permit todd have a take out restaurant in this location or a fast food restaurant in this location? the planning department and redevelopment and port and others have very, very specific regulations it's almost block by block. have you to bring into the planning department your address so they can look it up on the zoning map to see what you are permitted to have. before you get further involvement in a restaurant the first thing you have to do is see if it's allowed in this location. in many cases you will need to get a conditional use or other authorization which takes months and expensive and can be a deal killer right there. all these other agencies are involved the fire department are involved they are involved in assembly occupancies with an occupant load of 50 or more. the building department looks at constr

at the building back above 300 feet, the building would just be taller. this would be 550 feet and this building is way below that. this is 375. if you make the building taller, this would not be taller than a number of buildings in the surrounding area. what would happen if he complied with the code and set the building back, the generator on the rooftop would be much higher, and would be much further removed from all the surrounding properties, including a public plaza. we not know if this would lessen the impact. they did not quantify any of the noise impact. this is required in the guidelines, that they have to discuss whether a proposed project is conforming with the general plan of the city, the specific plan of the city, but are operative for an area. this is an area where it is policy to do something that we fretfully -- have asserted and this is not in line with this. you have to discuss this. the general public at large, decision makers have to understand if the project is in compliance with the general plan. if there is a special overlay. whene

. >> i am the chief building inspector. we are here at the base of telegraph hill to talk about a subject of great interest for the people of san francisco which is rockslide, slope stability, which caused a dramatic front-page news. i am here with two knowledgeable and wonderful guests. i am here with a geotechnical engineer and a geologist. we are here to talk about rockslide, rockfalls, and related issues. what is the difference between a geologist and a geotechnical engineer? >> and engineering geologist deals with identifying site characteristics, mapping, the ground's surface, collecting all of this data. the engineer can come up with medications and designs. >> the structural engineer might be working on a building if there is a building involved. what is your role? >> i am interested in the physical properties of the earth and how the earth will behave: subject to different load changes. when you are building a building, you are applying a load and you are wondering if the earth will be able to supply that load. we

it's it's right next to historic buildings three. -- it sits right next to a historic building three. they also indicate proposed height changes from 40 feet to now 52 feet, as shown in the maximum height plan of april, 2011. a height increase, one-story increase, while it does not sound significant, it constitutes a notable change in overall massing and form. together with a minor reduction in buildings block c-11, c-12, and c-13 from 70 feet to 65 feet, in the new the revised draft, i suggest these changes collectively constitute enough changes to reconsider the current eir and find the document in front of us in complete for approval -- incomplete for approval. there is one major issue out like to point out, and i think this is more than significant. in february of this year, the new height control plan was added to the maximum height control plan. this first appeared in the revised draft in february, and then again was published a few days ago in april, and it shows up on page 178. i do not believe the public has had the opportunity to read through all of these recently added docu

abut our buildings. the buildings to the south where one of the previous protesters were, this is a modern building and has a deep recess here and has another like well. there is a very nice rear yard that is shared by the residents on rosalind place. these are pictures from the roof of our project. these are the residents on clinton park. not only do they cover 80% of the lot, these take out the rest. this is a light well in the court. in working out our typical floor plans, we made a big effort not only to have it but 35 feet to the existing pattern but also to cut out this notch for our neighbors on clinton parks giving them a backyard that they will have. on all of the other light wells, we respected them by setting our buildings back at least 5 feet. in dealing with the facade, we started walking around and he liked the public interaction. in san francisco, we have many of our own precedents. our victorians are usually set back with stoops and stairs going back up. the majority of these buildings ha

in the building always has story polls. i saw the director of the planning commission and directly asked him in public comment about them, and 10 years later there were put in, and 10 days after that the pot -- the project was demolished. there was no writing, no legend, no explanation to the public about these raw poles standing up on one side of this park. incidentally, it is not a park being talked about. it is a playground. the park is what people like me have been waiting for since 2003, when there was plenty of public testimony. ex-commissioner lazarists has reinterpreted what that testimony was. i was at that hearing. the purpose was open space. that is why that glove was seized -- for open space. in regard to studies of what would happen with traffic if the street is partially or fully closed, there have been many studies. the writer of the eir picked and chose the streets he liked. one report showed 500 cars a day on mason street. that was a july 2009 study. staff did not use this study because they did not think i

it's not in the building code. it says the levers have to return to close to the face of the door so that you don't, as you are walking out, you don't get caught on the doorknobs by the lever sticking out. this was $29.95.ñr is this considered readily achievable in a building? i would say yes, of course. 30 bucks, change your doorknob to a lever hardware, one that's actually complying with the fire code, that's readily achievable. and if you don't do it, it's a problem. the ada says you should be making these readily achievable barriers disappear. here is something we see all over san francisco. power door operators. so this business has a slight gentle slope up to the door and they could not put a level landing in in front of that door. and on the inside of the door, if you can see this, there is a ramp on the inside. can you see that on this slide? the ramp begins right at the door and goes up. the way that they have achieved compliance in san francisco is to use an administrative bulletin that we allow people to

there is an underutilized building. we are perfectly happy with a building going in next door. we think the planning code is therefore a reason. we think that the setbacks are therefore a reason. if you are going to grant an exception. this is not a ministerial act. this is not by right. this is a discretionary process. there has to be a reason why this is an animating force behind why a property owner needs the exception and then you can analyze whether or not that is proper. what the developer has offered is that they said that we need this for a -- system. you can design this without the encroachment and still maintain a certification and the objectives of the project development. well, the project developers come back and in their submission, the only reason why they gave, this is referenced as a building designed. the only reason they have given why they does not work is that the current plans approved to not contain a dedicated -- which is required. well, putting aside the fact that the building is not conform to the planning code, that is not a reason. i would submit tha

welcome to the official opening of the extraordinary stem cell building that rises above us. signifies a major milestone in the history of our system cell research program. it is also a great day for the citizens of california who supported proposition 71 in 2004 and helped make this moment possible for the field of stem cell research and more importantly, for the human race. i want to extend a special welcome to the chairman of the california -- [applause] -- robert klein, the chairman of the california institute of preventive medicine, whose personal efforts mobilized the voters of california in support of the stem cell research initiative, and whose agency awarded ucsf a major brand towards construction of this building. i want to particularly express a very special welcome to four individuals. [applause] the vision and generosity of these couples, in support of this building and stem cell research throughout california have been a remarkable contribution to the field. all of us have ucsf and beyond thank you. when i came here just under two years ago, progress on the buil

to upgrade the building. obviously from an office building, we don't have the proper floor loading. any time you do any structural enhancements to the building, you also have to address sizing. so we're going to incorporate it to increase the floor loading as well as increase to meet the current seismic requirements for the building. in addition to occupying the building as a worship hall, we will be also widening the front staircase as well as the back staircase. there is a current elevator in place today which did not meet the building code requirements for a.d.a. or accessability. so we will also be moving the current elevator and incorporating the current elevator as part of the entrance. the front of the building also needs to be modified, because we have a staircase that runs up to the main floor. it's a building over a garage, as mr. smith had described. and with that, we will remove that staircase and within that we'll put a front door that leads into a staircase and to the elevator that reaches each

any other adjacent building. this would be required to meet all codes which control noise levels. the department of public health investigated complaints regarding fix mechanical source noises such as a ventilation systems, air-conditioning, motors and compressors. the district inspectors will take measurements to see if they stand to allowable levels. they will require the property owners to make sure that they are compliant. this might include times when the machinery is allowed to be turned on, relocating equipment, nor is compression measures, or other measures. the project is subject to the noise ordinance which regulates operational noise for all buildings in the city. the fourth point is air quality. this -- the operational air quality was considered less than significant. the proposed project would pose potential health risk, particulate diesel matter that is emitted during construction. the mission would not exceed the air quality management district significant threshold. the operation air quality impac

this building is beautiful art. those are architecture at the time when city hall was built, san francisco had an enormous french population. therefore building a palace in the art tradition is not unusual. >> jimmie was an incredible individual he knew that san francisco had to regain it's place in the world. he decided to have the tallest dome built in the united states. it's now stands 307 feet 6 inches from the ground 40 feet taller than the united states capital. >> you could spend days going around the building and finding something new. the embellishment, the carvings, it represents commerce, navigation, all of the things that san francisco is famous for. >> the wood you see in the board of supervisor's chambers is oak and all hand carved on site. interesting thing about the oak is there isn't anymore in the entire world. the floors in china was cleard and never replanted. if you look up at the seceiling you would believe that's hand kof carved out of wood and it is a cast plaster sealing and the only spanish

and up needed such a large building? there's plenty of abandoned buildings in san francisco that could house this program. other speakers have talked about the muni barn and it being on a dense street, i mean a busy street as being a reason to put it here. i say that's not a reason to put it here. it's already very impacted by the muni barn. the muni barn is a very bad neighbor. the employees come early, it starts up early. they idle. coming home in the evening they honk at people trying to pass them as they are idling. there is dire traffic congestion going on in this block. i just feel badly that we have been shamed to accept this overlarge building, you know, just because of the youth and we, all the things i have heard is that the neighbors oppose the size of the building and the scale and it coming outside of the planning nfl -- envelope as it is. we would jut like to keep it within the planning envelope and we don't have a problem with the youth. i feel like the architectal fees that have been spent -- >> thank you

of that building. if we were to build the building on the present site that goes all the way to lombard street, we would have a much larger library all on one floor and that would go from 8,500 square feet to 12 thousand square feet. president olague: thank you. peter warfield, bradley, lizzie hirsch. so i guess we should have mr. herrera, and mr. ginsburg wanted to speak. should it follow this portion of the hearing? i believe so. this is public commentary, so it would be when we hear the item, when the item is called, and it hasn't been called yet. >> this is public comment only on an item that has been closed. this is not the time for presentations. this is on the e.i.r. president olague: this is public comment on agenda items where the public hearing has been closed. which is only the e.i.r. but the actual e.i.r. hasn't been called yet. the actual item hasn't been called. >> i'm peter worfield, executive director of the library users association, and we have some strong concerns that we have been r

we did not cover buildings under by the city. recovered some affordable housing, but i am not exactly sure how much was covered in the analysis. >> i would assume that it is not in the analysis. dr. lee did not analyze government buildings or infrastructure. it comes to reject from damage to privately owned buildings. >> if i might add to that. through

like many of the better designed buildings, it is a building that has a lot of different aspects to it or prospects to it as you look at it from different positions. one of the elements that i want to draw your attention to is the first exception, which is the exposure exception. i don't know if you are familiar with the -- there is a little union gas station on the corner adjaceant to the project and they hike on that site to 65 feet. the exposure requirement actually deals with distance -- deals with exposure from the lot line. and the reason that this exception has been approved every time previously is that with a 65-foot height limit you won't even reach the lower podium of the building. all of the units above will have exposure even though it is situated where it is. this building has gone through two different designs. it was extended again in 2009 and 2010. but the magic of developing a high rise building is really how you approach the market. obviously we are coming out of one of the most difficult times we have had since the great depression. and crescent has taken an aggress