to provide with more information with regards to geotechnical considerations dbi reviewathize report and sublmental report and during dbi pchs review process the project will comply with applicable section thofz san francisco building code. the geotechnical report include a determination as to whether monitoring should be done for builds squgz streets during construction. the final buildings planerize reviewed by dbi and determine additional site specific reports if sites specific reports are required. further more, the project site is subject to the slope protection act adopted boo the board in 2008. this ordinance created procedures for additional review and slopes stability for properties within a certain area and established a structural advisory commithy for review oof permit application in the area. in summary, the appellate hasn't submitted substantial evident that support the conclusion there are unusual circumstances that justify removing the project from a class 1 categorical exemption. further more, the appellate hasn't presented stelsh evident there is a reasonable possib

all ones that were brought up here i mean, there was a question about construction i'll assume that dbi as investigated that to make sure the construction is compliant and there's construction problems with what was built there including the unit asked to be converted. >> i'm not aware of the issues unless the unit dbi has vigorously reviewed 4 of those cannot be legalized because of building requirement but we've reviewed the plans when it first came in to decipher how those housing units were compiled with a reconfigure the law but unarmed to the building other elements not meeting the building plans. >> the same with the quality of construction and things are obviously built equivocal or quite a while ago. >> i can't speak to the quality. >> it was dr requester for a presentation brought up questions about whether those were adequately constructed. >> i mean yes, they seem to meet the at least minimum requirement. >> the other issues is encapitulated i'm fine with that kind of approving that with the motion to the of any person(s) responsible for the ringing or use of a planning staf

sardana of dbi of the planning commission, of dbi there is a document. interesting that the permit holders have not mentioned this report in their responses. we feel before we are evicted from our home from 10 years, that the board should determine what is legal under the circumstances. due diligence was not done by dbi cord together -- according to the procedures and mr. duffy. it was made by mr. allen. mr. duffy did not prescribe it. he explains how he makes a personal determination on the unit status. this was never done for 57 a eureka. in fact the only thing used was the sole evidence that the contractor referenced it as a single family when they put in four aluminum windows. the permit holder purposely submitted unviewable copies of the permit. i ask you now to lieu particularly permits page 2, section 4 is not checked and say section 5 is checked. roman numeral five and 4 must be checked. subsequently a permit was issued indicating he would comply. if you look at the rules on the permit referenced section 3800, california code says it has to be re

and ownership responsibility of the wall it may encourage owners to use dbi enforement over issues of property lines, for these reasons, we're asking the aabatement is held in advance, until this issue is resolved. two of the three adjacent properties, the land surveys, the wall is located on the entire properties that is incorrect. the measurements on the survey, that was relied upon, portions of those walls are located on all three properties, if dbi is relying on the survey for issue of the abatement orders we're asking that the others be sited and brought into this action so it's uniform. just to provide context of the location of these walls, i will place an image on the overhead projector. so this is similar to the map we provided in exhibit a, that had an area view of the actual buildings, what you are seeing are the protwopts, 2856 washington and 2320 devisidaro here. the location of the retaining wall is shown in red, you can see the l shaped formation, there is a third property owner adjacent to both of these walls, right now, the two properties are corner to each other, you

you can come up. >> since the dbi mentioned that was not non-descriptive it conforms the one 05 and 67 a didn't need a san francisco permit i forgot to show you how the retaining wall was if so look at the back of the retaining wall inside the property itself this is set back was not all the time whatever it inside has always been a set back so the citation of the one 02 dot one pretty much is inappropriate and if you look at the retaining wall this is the this view use taken from the property of the complainant so we were asked you know to given a chance to get in. >> turn it. >> there you go perfect that makes sense. >> it is like almost completely flat i wanted to give a close view of the retaining wall itself now that is a left view of the reflecting there for a long, long time and serving both property okay we have the right side view now, one thing showed on the picture of dbi the parking this is a normal the way we look at it the normal sentiment but if you form the retaining wall the only distance from 4 feet below is below this and it is 4 feet the blood the california buildin

not just the dbi issue is a lot of departments that are involved. with that conversation with the fire department, department of health, continued situations with just egregious code violations, whether it is apartment buildings like the one at market and octavia. that was where these tenants were just living in just the most horrific conditions among war homes in -- i know my district, really it is a drug house that has gone on for decades, or a massive order, clutter issues that create a hazard for the entire neighborhood, and it just takes so long for any action to occur. it takes for so long for anything to be referred to the city attorney's office. if ever. to take that on a firm action and sue the property owner. i just want to see more effective enforcement that are working on legislation. the given language stalled apartments including dbi to have a more centralized approach, including not requiring a referral from a department to city attorney in order to file a lawsuit, which i think is a major bottleneck. it is a concern to reduce these f

so that $20 will go into the dbi general reserve. this motion will move that $2 million into a code enforcement newly created reserve. in addition the fee reductions being proposed in item number four will scale those back to the tune of $1 million per fiscal year creating another $2 million that we will then redirect into this newly created code enforcement reserve fund. so, i think totals so, i think totals about $3.75 million and so we distributed the amendments. on page 6 of 50 ordinance and we've double underlined sections. part of this is really a positive step forward, and ask for your support and that is my motion. >> thank you supervisor winner. first take public comment on item number four. anyone was to pop comment on this item? seeing none seeing none, public on undisclosed gallo >> i want to thank supervisor winner for bring this forward. this is not the brightest of the word [inaudible] so i want to thank either motion by supervisor winner on the amendment. second by supervisor mar we can do that without objection gallo

went live in october represented i didn't want systems between dbi and their finalizing their should be live in a couple of months wore pleased that can move forward. >> so in terms of case and permit cases are the projects that require a higher level the review and the permits are the permits we refugee have to say we're seeing an unpersistent number of projects this is the most promotions we've seen in the history of the department this is growing another a rate since world war ii we're trying to keep with the growth this is forcing us and urging us into a higher major critical policy issues affordable housing and transportation and short-term rental the office allocation dealing with the general plan updates and the pdr uses and those are policy issues driven by the growth in the city we're focusing and you'll see on the budget proposal altercation on the major policy issues as we move forward it is no secret this type of growth in san francisco is happening national in the urban centers we're seeing it because of the growth of the technology destroy driven by the 3.4 percent unem

seiu ks i've gotten him perhaps in records of supervisors and the mayor's office and people it says dbi i have no idea who they've taushgd talked to who is making those decisions you are sponsored to make the decision this is ant appropriate subject for hearing it is not some crazy woman off in the bushes like i feel how they go on to paint me i've spent 6 years on this a lot planning department spent 6 years on it processing the issues they've spent sometime presumably dealing with the enrollment actions i know they did because they stopped construction i have no idea what they did on the rest the timing is generous for me but i ask you what do you have as evidence the a those buildings are being used all of those buildings are where the housing u housing units are are the buildings legal? if you're legal listing some unit is that okay to legalize some unit but not the buildings? it would be unheard of from my experience that planning department has ever walked away from that issue can you legalized a portion of the unit without knowing the building is in compliance with you have the a

our system for dbi goes back to 1982. it's a lot of times if it's a termite report they are going to give it that permit. i wish it was better because some people use those permits and say i have 4 units. we see permits go from 2-4. we didn't see that. we have one from 2 and now 2-4. that's what i'm seeing. and then on the back of the building permit when it got built in '77. the permit was on the back. you can see the planning department two family dwelling with 2 off street parking spaces. so, that's just some of the building stuff that i have with me. i'm available for any questions. >> there is one additional bit of information included in the letter of determination. when the building was built, there is a legalizing where a building was done and was adopted for the purpose of allowing illegal units to be legalized part of that program allows or essentially grants a waiver from a lot of planning code requirements, 95% of them to allow these units to be legalized if they had existed prior to january of 2013. i want to

>> commissioners, joe duffy, dbi. i don't have much. it's a site permit which has been approved and the addendum is currently being reviewed. but i don't have any building issues to bring up unless anyone has any questions. >> there was a claim that there were inadequate fire exits and the additional of the lower units would pose a significant danger to safety personnel should there be a problem like a fire. >> i did hear that whenever the gentleman spoke there. i wasn't familiar with the code section that he gave. if he wants to elaborate more on that on rebuttal. this code 12 something i don't have that. my understanding on a 2-unit building is that you don't have to exit from the public way from the rear. you can exit to the rear yard. i have spoken here before about that. but if there is something in the code that i'm missing, i would like to get that section. i didn't see it in the brief. if he has that, maybe i can speak to it again. >> thank you. >> any public comment on this item? if there is more than 1 person speaking please m

-- so with dbi there's you know recently a small solo practitioner shared her experience of getting her business her business open and so you know this is somebody -- they are opening in in a 291 square foot place and putting paint on the wall and not doing anything else yet but yet we're asking them for architectural drawings so there's a lot of little nuances that have room room for improvement. >> all right. thank you. >> shall we move onto the next item. >> yes. item number 9 the president's report. >> i don't have anything to report except that last week i attended two events and they were very successful and that continues to be a great initiative here in the city and of course next week small business week i encourage everyone to participate as much as they can and straus events has done a fantastic job of organizing it as always that's all i have. >> the the vice president's report? >> nothing to report. >> item 11, commissioner reports? >> no? >> item 12 new business. >> nothing for tonight. >> then so item number 13 is adjournment. >> mr. dwight motion to adjourn do we hav

>> just one question, there will be three fte and this will be through your office and planning and dbi and have their own stuff as well. >> it will be split between the city administrator and planning and dbi will not super a role other than advice, yes, because the enforcement and the current law has all of the enforcement under plan and they have ramped up and hired positions and so three positions will remain at plan and three with the city administrator. so we are going to co-locate and as well as at the planning department and we are working out the roles and responsibilities but we will focus on working with the treasurer tax collect and her planning and the regulation process to stream line that process and we will work out the complaint process, along with planning. >> okay, so a total of 6 ftes so far for the entire office. >> thank you. >> okay. >> major initiatives, when i come to this body during the budget season and first and foremost that is important to me as a city administrator is improving the public safety and health and so i, and making sure that the medical examin

duffy. >> commissioners, joe duffy, dbi. we can be talking about a building built last year. it doesn't matter what year it was. we have a building permitted as a 2-unit building. we give a certificate of final completion as a 2-unit building. i wasn't around in the 70s in san francisco but i would imagine the inspector hopefully saw 2 units and didn't turn and eye to that. it's not the first time we have signed off on a building and we got a complaint that it's not right and we go back. it happens quite on. >> 70s was a business time. >> we have to put up the permit on what it was for and what it was signed off as. what happened after the sign off. i don't know maybe something else happened. i would like to think the inspector gave a permit for 2-unit instead of four. after this, anything could happen. in my experience that has happened. it's happening right now. so when you are gone, when the building inspector is gone and you want to change something, that's on you. it doesn't make it legal, but it's on you then. and if someone files a complaint then we investigate that an

the deparchlt of building inspection may say to remove a unit but [inaudible] i hope to work with dbi to [inaudible] with the new program to legalize in-law units there is no reason we should continue to allow these units to be removed. land use last week we amended the controls to oonl apply to urge merger of legal unit and ask for your support on this resolution today and look forward working with the dbi and planning department to work with unpermitted unit many which are in district 11 >> seeing no other names on the roster, colleagues can we take this item same house, same call? without objection the resolution sudopted unanimously >> item 23 is a resolution to establish a board of supervisor policy that police staffing levels be adjusted to account for population and neighborhood growth >> supervisor wiener >> thank you madam president. colleagues today before us is a resolution and authored along with altogetherers supervisor cohen and supervisor farrell calling for a increase in the police staffing level to take population grouth and staffing into account. by any measure colle

nuisances in english, and as i said it took me two years to really figure out the whole thing between dbi, bureau street use and mapping and historic preservation and if english isn't your first language how much more difficult is it to understand what is required. >> i agree with the comments and the only thing i would add is what i have seen is that there's a need to determine where information can be best disseminated. just one example i was very surprised i had a meeting with the l.a. county library system and they asked us and i wasn't sure how we would connect and to my shock they said we have so many small business owners that come into the branches that we had to create economic development positions within the branches and they have thousands of small business owners coming because there is concern if they go to a city agency or a federal agency they might get dinged or there's that fear whereas the library is a trusted place. oftentimes it figuring out how to best disseminate the information and key to small business owners and shift the mind-set. another thing is again i point

. >> testifier: commissioners joe duffy dbi. we actually do not see that many like this.permits from 2004 an hour in 2015. but, around the time that the gentleman was "the architect, we have seen a lot like this worker mix were issued as a site permit, and for funding reasons, the economy whenever, we were in a position in dvi extensions were pretty common. this is one of them i think that i describe is that. one of the issues with the site permits are, when you are say permit is issued -- in this probably took six years to get. it was around planning for a while and i am not sure why the applicant, whatever but once i say permit was issued, that such a clock running on your time to do your project. however -- and it has always been something that i could never understand -- you can start working. you have to get your addendum approved that normally, people, and fairly quickly and that addendum through so they can get working. everybody wants to build. in this case a doctor site permit issued by cutting the architect explained that they were ready to build that there was

including dbi to have a more centralized approach, including not requiring a referral from a department to city attorney in order to file a lawsuit, which i think is a major bottleneck. it is a concern to reduce these fees. but without the reduction before say a large downtown development? you are talking one of the big massive buildings being built downtown what would that cut be in terms of the reduction they would experience? >> generally, the fee reduction is 7% overall. for all those projects >> so i know it has a range but what would the range of a building permit fee be? >> some people would be 7% [inaudible] plus or minus. for the whole entire year. >> so a lot project would be up paid more than $84 million? >> no it is not the project it is overall. we do not keep of each project. it is overall. for the 7%. >> 4 million a year? >> yes. >> okay well it is a continuing discussion were working with the controller will keep you in the loop. thank you. >> supervisor yee >> i guess this is really related to supervisors wiener's question. now that you are sufficient amount of funds po

so colleagues, this is on dbi feeds a new supervisor winner has some amendments to proposal but will do is after bubblegum and kick a motion to approve this item and send forth to the july 4 14. >> supervisor winner >> thank you very much. we mention ugly posing an amendment to take some of these funds that were going to be in the form of the cuts and put them into a reserve fund for increased code enforcement by the department. whether it's hiding the asserted city attorney to property owners that are violating housing codes of building codes. we have a significant deficit of code enforcement in san francisco, and we need to really prioritize it more. so, as you know, colleagues, because of the explosion of building permits in san francisco, department of building inspection is accumulated a significant surplus, which is good and that hopefully be able to cushion the blow when economy goes into a downturn and we will have as much boom and bust hiring and layoffs at dbi. but there is a proposed reduction in building permit fees so that were not violating laws, essential, in terms of

actually, dbi does more -- there is other departments who do exceptionally little code enforcement and refer almost nothing to the city attorney's office. ddi certainly does more particularly in the house inside, but it is a massive need. i am concerned -- or understand the reserves are growing because we have this boom-bus situation with depending on whether there is development and construction happening or not. i know you been working with the controller so they are not giving away the entire reserve in the vehicle should the next downturn because we do not want to see mass layoffs again, but i would like to get some thought about what else we could do with those funds in terms of increasing code enforcement, both in terms of ddi's own code enforcement and in working with the city attorney's office. i would like to see a bigger role for the city attorney's office in going after some of the egregious violations that we see. i also in this potential use for funds in terms of for example, tens of thousands of illegal units that we have given people ask for legalization, but you have a

nothing structured that can say that is a permanent structure okay now on the site plan shown by the dbight you can see from this point that the actual storage shed is about 35 feet away from the retaining wall and this is where the citation description because of this you know the dirt went to the backside and so on across the unsave you know of the structure and there was no mechanical use you know putting the pipe on and the masonry bricks and the storage shed or the power tools pretty much is manual itself so the point as we discussions about the neighbor that's been asking for a compensation or you can see restructuring of the retaining wall for the use the gentleman acquired the property there's no rain for us to constrict the wall it was a a long time ago if you look at the mls that was submitted to you the mls the property actually was built before the complainant and the property has been there for a long, long time even before we sold the property the way we look at it there was a discretionary about the plumbing one inch from the 4 feet from the top of the retaining wall okay.

. >> what is dbi doing to enforce the code? >> to answer your question, it's harder to do but we may be hitting certain number. >> spot checking. >> yeah. [ indiscernible ] >> dbi only has 25 housing inspectors so they're hoping these warning letters will prompt property owners to comply on their own. if you're concerned about your balcony and your property owner won't have it inspected you can file an anonymous complaint with the department of building inspections. kpix.com/linksandnumbers. julie watts, kpix 5. >> there have been a handful of railing and stair collapses since the ordinance was passed in 2002 but the department of building inspections says there have been no balcony collapses in san francisco. >>> sounds like a case of big brother. uber could know exactly where you are even if you're not looking for a ride by one of its drivers. kpix 5's mike sugerman with why uber wants to follow your every move. >> you use an app and you turn it on and you figure yeah, the internet company is going to know a whole lot about m

first the head of commission and the head for the depth of the environment and the third, the head of dbi department of building inspection. >> that would have been annoyed to have that concluded it is new information. >> thanks. >> i'm charles for the record representing f o e in part not common cause i wanted to suggest to you that the salary struck me as low for this progression o positions given the expenses of this city especially in regards to housing housing is inflating so fast it maybe those numbers are not reasonable and i wonder if, in fact i'm not an expert within the salaries with an the department this salary level falls below some of the employees of that department so it would be awkward to have the director earn less than staff it seems to me that is a question that needs to be explored if we- i don't see any reason the salary can't be raised given the importance of job and if it is true that the consulting firm salary is a proportion of this salary of the executive director if you decide midstream to raise that salary what impact will it have on the xhoulths contract or

the future i know you referred those to me and i've referred those but once they start rebuilding the dbi will determine if this is excessive demolition but section 317 if they have dry rot they can't replace those walls they need to rare and replace those instead. >> thank you. >> commissioners, if there's nothing further we can move onto the regular calendar item 12 for case m t and z the central selma plan to fund public benefits this is an informational presentation. >> good afternoon commissioner wu and planning commissioner steve with the planning department staff i'm here to talk about the central selma and the feasibility campaigns a milestone we're talking about what we want to see in central selma what kind of demands it can address we've been talking about how to make central selma a great neighborhood for the 21st century and this is really the bridge between the conversations the first thing we'll see the plan in its full entirety outing how to works together from here we'll have robust conversations on what we can really achieve with the plan for now, it's a soft focus you c

experience it they'll sit at the permit center and form a nucleus of the acceleration team with planning and dbi and health and other departments that is the pilot year focusing on restaurants and od other food recommend businesses we'll look to build on the lessons and continue to expand our biological inches focused with the businesses ahead in terms of neighborhood in the year ahead straight and other capital projects cause disruptions in anticipation of that oewd will launch a program for grants and marketing and businesses for 10 corridors effected by the construction we'll also launch an express to the outdoor neighborhoods additionally we'll expand our commercial districts to deepen the critical work to support them in japantown and the fillmore and other areas and implementing the projects that booster those neighborhoods in the year ahead launch to vacate the building with a historical significance and implement creativity short time and long term for underutilized assets our budget includes the funding for the rebate program we've seen a strong demand and finally in terms of workforce

were designed by jimmy in delta design he went to prison because he committed fraudulent plans and dbi was not checking the plans and construction there were active cases on those and the variance is an exception to unit that would not be required in the buildings had been constructed legally that was the basis for my appeal and sent subsequent letters to the deserve and many cia about this there's been - you have the briefs there they don't deal with this at all it is going on to original construction who does it if plans were originally approved by the planning commission and they're coming back to the planning commission for another entitlement on brandon and pennsylvania street and you don't have acquiring minds to find out what happened? the assumption is great we're not constructed in corneas with the planning commissions approval a bus their modifying the plans to getting give it legitimate and b two complaints on pennsylvania i've asked mr. sanchez and mr. seiu crepe to pleased amend their reports and duo deal with the issues outlined in my letters and the letters from buster i

budget by $8.8 million, incorporating additional to my dollars in fee revenue, based on the memos to the dbi legislation that you just made. appropriating the additional funds for affordable housing, and adjusting starting fund balance in order to balance the amendment that you're making. in addition, i would advise you that the balance of the mayors technical adjustment reserve, $4.79 is available for the committee for appropriation. >> thank you. we are using that as part of our budget that isaac ivo motion to accept the mayors technical adjustments as provided by the mages budget director? . we can take that without objection >>[gavel] >> collies, now motion to approve items two and three. today's agenda as amended to approve the proposed annual appropriation and salary ordinances and authorize the controller to make adjustments necessary to implement the committees actions and bouncy counts them into four to the full board of supervisors for the july 14 meeting. move wicks move wicks we can take that without objection >>[gavel] >> everyone thank you very much for all your hard work and i

construction of all new net housing including affordable housing the department estimates the - the dbi averages $1,500 for the permit fees and 167 hundred per approved permits from the fee waiver had been there the cost would be roughly $42,000 this is the budget and the importance of the legal listing existing housing the department supports this from the departments waives waves the opportunity the fee waiver been published in the commission decided not to waive it will be agendize and not probably be phobic for several months after it is published that concludes my remarks my sophie has to do with hayward. >> thank you very much for the opportunity to come and spec speak with you this is unusual pursue i'm sure you're aware of the citywide affordable fund fees from affordable housing programs are deposited a fund and fees fees including the houses illogical and the inclusionary condo condominium conversion and the fees by housing in the market octavia and eastern neighborhoods are all deposited into the citywide housing fund it seeks to collect two awful nostril by the controller's