and health code, the police code an ad in code, the public works code. we have two pieces of the existing legislation. the blight ordinance and our sidewalk inspection and repair ordinance, which actually work very well. they are very effective because they are designed to enable us to, once we have identified a problem, if the property owner does not address it, it allows us to address it and recover the city's cost. we do not have that ability with the myriad of other aspects of the codes that we are meant to enforce. they have cumbersome processes and the legal means of cost recovery, so they are, frankly, not very effective. what this proposed legislation does is for all those other elements of public right of way in enforcement that we have responsibility for, it basically holds them into the plight ordinance, allows us to use that process, which we have found has been very effective. just so you know, i know you have had questions about blight, and i think have called for a hearing on it. the plight ordinance was initially intended to address kind

the code says what order. what the priority is of how you spend that 20 percent in section 1134 capital d combepgz number one. the priority is the path of travel to the area of remodel do that first. that includes the front door and the metal hardware and the restrooms and it goes down and gets to the parking. it's almost always you start at the front and work your way back. the area of remodel always has to comply with the disabled access regulation. there was a question here? let's get that. >> the fine point on the cost. 11 119,900. is the 20 percent in addition? >> if that was 119 thousand dollars in construction you have to spend another 20 percent to meet the disabled access. >> reality is 20 percent more. contract price. >> yeah. you are allowed to deduct the amount includes to do the disabled access work. i'd have to look the specific language in 1134 d how you deduct that. there are certain things that are exempt from disabled access. disabled access is required when you are doing alterations, structu

versus a building that just barrel met the code. -- barely met the code. if you touch it, i've got to worry about this, i've got to worry about this. >> the financial strain of the building asked the designers and engineering to not overdesign, other than to meet the design of the codes. >> except for owner occupiers. >> they will say yes, we want to exceed that. but most of the case, people are meeting the minimum standards of the code. which we all have acknowledged is what society acceptance as a minimum standard -- accepts is a minimum standard. it is within margin. when you are looking at something that meets a minimum standard you're always looking right at the edge, you know, how can we correct this without getting it to go below the minimum standards, how can we do tenant improvement work to make sure it complies and continues to comply. >> because one of the things in the building is, tenants love to connect floors together. so they have their own private tenant spaces. that's an engineering issue. the tenants love to have files. so if you design

i'm not sure what happened on that permit but if the code is correct, if the building code was used, i don't even see how those windows are on the property line. >> if that was a mistake made in 1998 and people have been relying on that to all of those years, what is the solution? >> the pill department is not get involved in that. >> in with the owner of that building be required to close off those windows for fire reasons? >> in today's code, that would be the case, yes the. >> if this goes through, he will have the additional burden of having to shut those off and increase the fire resistance? >> yes. >> we would not cite that for that problem. this is something they should be thinking about. >> it is there public comment? >> i have not been here in ages. we have a lot of sexy issues. the appellant of the dance house are good friends of mine. the issues to be good neighbors. that is the issue. mr. dufty has said that usually before now, they sat down and work this out. this is a discrepancy that should be worked out. there has been name-calling going on by the respondent party. ac

no other part of the planning code will be relevant to regulation on the islands. the design for development document which in addition to rereflecting the controls and the special use district contains a more comprehensive set of building standards and design guidelines for vertical development. the d for d also lays out design for the island and streets and open developments but these are referred to as horr zontle development under tihdi. key aspects of the special use districts and d for d including height limits and bulk are problematic elements that would be vested to the developer in the development agreement before you so any future proposed changes to the s.u.d. or d for d that would affect these aspects of the project would require with the developer. special use district, new zoning districts and height and bulk districts in the zoning maps. the next action is resolution to assign priority for up to 100,000 gross square feet of office space on treasure island pursuant to the office use program. granting such approval would provide priority for any such o

this won't replace the city code. but there are items in the code about front setbacks. which are very clear and very explicit in that those are to be maintained and tearing those down or making them less attractive is a problem and it creates a problem in the historic district, it creates a problem for the neighborhood, it creates a problem for property values. i think that to say that these are temporary is rather strange because there's -- around the corner on guerrero street there's a front setback where all the trash cans are simply placed in the yard, in the front setback and that to me is equally temporary. the point here really was if you're going to do a major renovation to the first floor of the building, there's an opportunity to do something which is permanent and which really meets the guidelines of the planning code about keeping the front setbacks clear and that's as far as i'm concerned, that's the bottom line. i think that should be done. i don't look upon this as a temporary structure. i look upon it as being a permanent structure because the opportunit

as a code complying permit and project. the staff neglected to notify the b.b.n. holder, who then contacted the zoning administrator, requesting that the issued building permit application be suspended, which he did, and which was. subsequent to that, i issued a b.b.n. letter to mr. hoffman per the requirement and waited the 10-day period, during which he filed for this discretionary review on an issued code complying permit. >> so in your opinion the d.b.i. has reviewed all of -- there are a number of items brought up as being things that the continuance would allow d.b.i. to review. but you feel these have been reviewed? >> d.b.i. has already approved the permit that is under this particular hearing's discretion. as far as the issue -- as far as the issues that were raised, i read some of the concerns on his request for continuance and they all seem to fall under strictly d.b.i.'s complaint line and for them to go out and investigate and isn't really under the sort of scope of what we're here to do today. >> one would expect that even if we didn't take d.r. and

and it will apply on all fees that are in the planning code and in the administrative code. and this is an annual process that is administered by the controller's office. it's based on the two-year average consumer price index for the san francisco-san jose primary metropolitan statistical area. normally we wouldn't come to the commission to communicate this. but because where proposing some other changes, we're going ahead and adjusting all of the fees accordingly. next, there is a very minor technical adjustment that we're proposing on administrative code section 31.22-12-3, for ceqa basic fees. there were two pieces of language that were added to this ceqa code last fiscal year. they were in section 31.228.12 in regard to monitoring conditions of approval and mitigating monitoring. and section 31.22-b-1 and six in regard to the $52 fee that is assessed on installment payments that are made. so those -- that language was added last fiscal year. and we never upped the actual reference to the c.p.i. adjustment was never actually implemented then. so this is just a very minor

not knowing which area code you will be dying, which one is it? this is a new one or the 405 code. now that you are a 408 user, you'll only have to dual szen digits. under the new method, you'd have to doll all differents. >> just having to do these extra digits can be confusing knowing which area -- what area am i in? >> the areas affected by the area code switch include san jose and most of santa clara county. the supervisor who voted in favor of the method says change is inevitable. >> growth forces change. >> now ultimately, it's up to the california public utilities to decide. when and how they will implement the new area code. this time yeast year, all the 405 numbers are going to be taken. >> they are going fast. >>> it has taken 60 years for someone to finally decide the n word has to go. tonight, why one group han told thanks, but no thanks. oice that could mean money in the bank. >>> women have a choice when they get married. keep their maiden name or take their husbands. why it's a decision that could keep money in your pocket. >> the cash strapped kansas city slow. >> w

but the planning department has a responsibility to update its own code. we have a code system that has a whole. there are no notices for anything. these are the areas at the northern end in the eastern end of district 3. it is an intense area. it is an intense area commercially. people live there. the planning department has a responsibility to plow through this and allow people to get involved before your told of a $500 and you have 20 days to do it. i am really sympathetic to this woman and her frustration. the planning department should immediately come back to you next week with a notice procedure. you can do it on an interim basis, when you have got to cure it. this should not be allowed to happen. the needs to be broader community discussion. this is telegraph hill, north beach. it deserves better. i am not involving anything except i read it and i said, all my god. i thought there would be some issues is looking at the map. i don't live there. the staff has got to pay attention to areas that are really congested and dense. president olague: any add

in lieu of the regular california building code, in place of what they call the regular code. that allows you to do things to preserve the integrity of the building, and people say that saving the building is the greenest thing you can do because of the energy and materials. all sorts of opportunities, but it is not written as a green coat. but really, that is the fact a bit. >> yes, absolutely. of course there are limitations where transportation or other uses to be substantially changed. but in general, maintaining existing buildings is critical. >> and it has to do with building their ability. that is an issue. we are on to talk about this nationwide premier green building program of a product, many products that we use. it does not have too many points, but vulnerability is a topic that i think everyone to focus on. if you build a building that lasts for 100 years, it is a greener building and that designed without materials going 20 years and you have to take a new sign and window and replace the building. >> it is recognized in directly. there is credit in major systems

is it the new one or the 408 code? >> reporter: now if you are a 408 user calling another 408 area code number you only have to dial seven digits but under the new overlay method you'd have to dial all 10 digits including the area code. >> just having to dial those extra digits can be very confusing knowing which area i am in. >> reporter: the areas affected by the area code switch include san jose and most of santa clara county. a supervisor that voted in favor of the overlay method says change is in effectible. >> growth forces changes. >> reporter: now, ultimately it is up to the california public utilities commission to decide when and how they are going to implement the new area code but, ken, they will have to ask fast because by this time next year they are going to run out of 408 numbers. >> do it now. elizabeth cook in san jose. thank you, elizabeth. >>> what a difference a day makes. the driver that was nearly a victim yesterday is facing charges today. why police now find her story to be suspicious. >>> what

and the california historical building code superseeds the regular building code. for example, you don't have to make the front door of the restaurant fully compliant with the ada or the california title 24. this is an example. you my meet the california historical building code in a qualified historic building by having a door that is 31 inches wide instead of 32 inches wide. and may have a power door operator, keep everybody happy and preserve the facade of the building and save money. i encourage to you think about the historic building code and the values we are trying to save. >> 4, select a location already zoned as a legally permitted restaurant. not just zoned but was a restaurant once upon a time. it's so much easier. the utilities, gas, power. power is a problem. we mentioned that a couple of times. getting powers and gas pg and e has a big backlog. now in san francisco we are seeing restaurants and other businesses opening with temporary generators pending the final connections by bg and e. building and fire have a separate process before the builteding

it's in the state fire code. 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

since 1994 we used the california building code. prior to that we used the san francisco building code. if everybody uses the same building code and everybody defines it the same way, what is a building less than a high- rise? not a high-rise. people in formally call that a mid rise building. there is no official definition. this is just not a high-rise building. they use the same code on the peninsula and the central valley and everywhere and at los angeles. >> from the time when the permit is issued and the plans are drawn. >> how long will it take to build these? >> two years apiece. >> that is fairly basic. >> about 22 months for the smaller one and 24 months for the bigger one. >> any idea how long it took to get the permits? >> i have been working on this project since 2002. we submitted to planning in 2004 probably. we actually reconfigured the building once. it took us about three years to get the title and design and about one year to get the building permit. >> that sounds like a traditional san francisco building, and tha

code. there is not a pattern of these smaller lots, a predominant pattern in the district. we found at less than 2% of the 1000 lots within 1,000 feet, 1868 lots within 1,000 feet of the property, that less than 2% were smaller than 1100 square feet in size. also, as the product sponsor stated, their alternative is here. they can go through the condominium process. they have not exhausted all of their remedies to achieve the goals that have separate ownership, that means available to them. i am assuming they qualify for the condo, it would have on our occupancy for that time, sounds like approximately 10 years. that i think summarizes most of the points i want to make. some of the other sites that were pointed out by the product sponsor, many of them were nowhere within 1,000 feet of the property and were in different neighborhoods of the city. there were some that were close by, a few properties on cortland. however, those are very distinct and they are 3 lots. there is a different develop

code. we have small homes and small lots and narrow streets. the typical lot size where i live is 25 by 70. that is 1750 square feet, and that is the size of most floor plans in other neighborhoods, so we already have small lots, and we have many substandard sell- offs -- lots in the neighborhood, so the map i want to show you is this one, and this is the property, and you can see the subject property. there is the property across the street, and there is another property here, so what is compelling to mae is this demonstrate they allowed the property owner to slip a lot, and it has been my observation -- to split the lot, and it has been my observation you grant the same rights to everyone equally, and i think this is compelling, that they are sandwiched between two properties. the end result -- the other thing that is a difference is that all the neighbors support this. and i am running out of time, so i want to say, i do not know if you have a chance to look at this, and the appellant di

it also places people in the task force under air conflict of interest code. that would be an action that is subject to referendum. given that we understand that there is a desire to get the task force convened quickly and up and running and doing its work, it seems imprudent to have that piece of it tied to legislation. what we are suggesting is to divide the file. i have done that for you already. we have copies of it. we could divide the file and create to get be of different ordinances. one would reconvene the districting taskforce and one would designate the members of the task force under the conflict of interest code. convening the task force would not be subject to referendum. then the task force could be up and running and conducting its business without delay. >> our city attorney has proposed that we divide the file. in motion by supervisor mirkarimi. sentiment by avalos. s --econded by avalos. with regards to the separate file, that would amend the city's conflict of interest code. that should be the case as well. why do we not now move to roll cal

future phases should conform to their current code requirement. this should reflect the most recent on special area plans, the ones that i just mentioned. i would like to comment on the shortcomings. and moving all of these things into one motion. this requires massive commitments of the funding code and the general plan among many others. this alone requires a high degree of scrutiny and accountability for all regulating documents including the document which guides the design of the project and divine -- the sign for development. in reviewing this document, it requires more than simply reading it. that requires physical testing. you can see if networks. i had to spend a little bit of time. i chose blocks 6b and 6a, which i chose for the purpose of this review. these blocks were chosen randomly. this shows that that they are incomplete. the few guidelines that are examined raise different questions. they require direction and supervision of others, more detailed guidelines. they will set out for light projects. i request that each guideline that

>> the issue is the building code compared with the planning code. with the planning code, we're concerned with the illegal units. we came up with a bulletin that refines what could be approved on the ground floor. we look at bathrooms. that is the critical thing, bathrooms, what bars, 1 3/6, things like that. in terms of windows, project laundry sinks, things like that. in terms of bedrooms, that is up to the building code. president goh: is there any pubn this item? seeing none, commissioners, the matter is submitted. commissioners? commissioner fung: are you the realtor? are you related? >> no, no. commissioner fung: a friend? >> helping the permit holder communicate with the office because of language barriers. president goh: i think we're finished hearing from both sides, though. we will discuss it. commissioner fung: she is not being paid or as an agent, and she is allowed public comment. president goh: would you like to ask her question, commissioner? commissioner fung: no, i think she is allowed public, if she is not a party. president goh: i

in the valencia district in planning code section 726.41. staff recommends approval with conditions. the bases for this recommendation is that the project promotes small business ownership, its neighborhood serving use, it's well served by transit, it means all of the applicable mr. clintonning code section, and it consistent with the intent of the valencia street district and the general plan. it's also an existing restaurant so there would be no expansion to the percentage of eating and drinking establishments in the n.c.t. staff received two letters in opposition, one which was received after your commission packet, and i have that here for your review. and that's all i have. so if you have any questions, i will be available. >> thank you. project sponsor? >> hello, commissioners, i'm emily and here with my husband john. we are the owners of dosia, owners and operators of dosa. i want to tell you a little about ourselves and our request. i'm sure you have seen a number of clients like us but this is our first time going through this proce

california code says 120 square feet. san francisco says 100. fire escapes need lots of maintainence. this requires a fire escape person or contractor to test it, lube it, maintain it. you have to keep it painted and scrubbed. wire brush. this is one of those folding ladders, which we used to approve. we still approve other folding ladders. what do you have to do? >> if any of you have a ladder you are depending on for eggress, you don't want to wait until there is a fire. there is a lever to pull, and you should check it once a year to make sure it is still working, the bolts haven't rusted out, the mechanism still works. they're dangerous enough to use in a fire, but if they aren't working perfectly, there is more of a danger trying to use these ladders than there is running through fire. bucha>> you can climb down easi. my mother can. my wife can. >> if you are trying to get out with a toddler or a baby, forget it. >> for that reason, we no longer allow people to put those letters there and say it is equivalent, becaus

we think that the planning code is there for a reason. certainly, exceptions are granted, but wait a minute. you are going to give someone an exception to the planning code that is-we going to impact my property. that is not what they are for. whether we're talking about an exception or a variance. it has to be determined that it will not have a negative impact. then you of the adjacent property owner, one saying that it will impact our views, it will probably impact what we can get. the property has been there. let's say they cannot bring it back all of the way. they cannot bring it back all of the way. this was just to set the building back. they still meet the 15-vote sent back. they can decide to go higher. they can still give the amount of square footage of this. they can still have their 18 to 1 far. it was a code conforming building, and he said it was. we have a difference of opinion. this did not go any higher than this building. it also significantly cut into this. .a conforming building would be one that maintained the square f

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 that this board has the authority to continue this ma

we are happy with the wording, and the code advisory committee was also happy in the end. it is a necessary document that smoke control systems are complicated systems, required in all new high-rise buildings and in some other buildings, specialty occupancies, but they involve many different disciplines -- sprinkler systems, fire alarm systems, architectural elements of the building, mechanical systems -- and they require a lot of coordination between the various trades and making sure that all these various systems of comply with the smoke control report. this document will give guidance to designers to know what is required for these of middle and approval of these systems. -- for the submittal and approval of the systems. commissioner lee: any other questions? public comment? -- commissioner hechanova: other questions? public comment? >> seeing that, item nine -- >> do we need to approve? i move to approve administrative bulletins or support or whatever the language is, both 7 and 8. commissioner murphy: second. commissioner hechanova: the motion has been moved and seco

>> the code is gray. a lot of the properties in san francisco, the living room is on the second floor and there is no where to post it on the ground, so you see it on the second floor of the time per tha. president goh: if you were to revoke, there would not be a one-year waiting time? >> no, it should be over the counter approval. mr. sanchez could speak to that. there are involved in the approval. president goh: and they could appeal that if there were still inclined to do so? >> yes, there were discussions with the property owner. it seemed they were not in favor of having any openings on that property line. that is the subject of the appeal. obviously, the other folks, if they want to appeal that permit, for other reasons, they are more than welcome. but these people at 171 indicated to me today that the kind of knew that was a big mistake and it should never have had the openings on the side of the building. i think they want to revise the whole floor plan and make the openings on the other side, whe

and tax code. this legislation addresses a gap in the city permitting for limited live performances as an excessry use in restaurants, cafes and bars. and other small businesses whose primary function is not the presentation of live performances. it creates a permit for a modest level of live performance in small business where it's currently not allowed. hundreds of cafe, restaurants, bars and other small businesses cannot legal lie offer their customers -- leaguely offer their customers live performances because the only permit available is the one suitable for night clubs and those permits can be extremely cost prohibitive. currently a cafe owner wanting to offer a solo guitar performance until 10:00 p.m. would be with required to obtain a place of entertainment permit which typically requires a $1,700 nonrefundable application fee. cat fay would then have to create a security plan and make other arrangements associated with major events like a solo guitar player. in some parts of the city, a ca

he talks about the code of silence. that is about the fact that there is. how you prevent the code of silence? it is like how do you prevent crime? or how do you stop crime, let's put it that way. the best way to prevent these kinds of indiscretions, or as you will, from happening, is to ensure each level of your organization is responsible for the people that they supervise. and you inspects, you audits, you ensure, and then it becomes part of the culture. i will tell you one of the best tools i have seen in my career -- two of the best tools. no. 1, tape recorder. two, video camera. i am not talking about watching "cops" on tv. it is a couple of things. number one, the officer is going to act differently because they know they're being found. number two is i suggest that utilize the person you are talking to there being recorded for film. no. 3 is there is verification of what exactly happened. there are multiple of benefits in that. in the greenroom, we were talking about the cost of outfitting of one car. how much does it cost for a lawsuit? what does i