Transcripts For SFGTV Government Access Programming 20180223

Actions to the spirit and intent of this process. Again, thank you for reviewing this ordinance today and on behalf of myself and the supervisor, we respectfully request your support and im happy to answer any questions. Vice chair walker. Commissioner walker thank you for coming back. I fully support the concept of this. I have a couple of questions. Do we have a projection of what the financial effect of this might be . Have we looked at that . Deputy director inspection services, ed sweeney. We will be getting fees for the permits. This is just to waive the notice of we had no way of doing it because the Building Code wouldnt allow us. I recognize we are trying to legalize an industry. We had a flyer two weeks ago in one of the groves. This person just took off. The owner of the property has never seen him again. Thats what were trying to do. Trying to bring these people in, make them have safe places and try to make it a little easier on them. Like i said, we have had fires. Weve had various things over the years with these groves. If we have a way forward to legalize them, im all for it. Financially, the department is prepared to sacrifice. We will be getting some fees for when they come in and get the permits to make this right. So, its not like were not going to get any money. Just we wont be getting the penalties. President mccarthy commissioner gilman. Vice president gilman it seems like it would be nominal from where i sit. But since we just passed the budget and sent it to the board of supervisors for next fiscal year. Could you just say if i was in a warehouse and receiving a notice of violation, what might a fee be . It is usually electrical. Vice president gilman say i have a electrical error, what would my fine possibly be . Right now weve done 61 sites. These are from last week. So, were a little farther ahead. Penalties paid, b. I. C. Will be getting that money back. 6,200 and penalties not paid it is not huge. Vice president gilman okay. It is nominal and to legalize this and make people safe. Im in support. President mccarthy commissioner walker and then commissioner lee. Commissioner walker i think it is prudent for us to anticipate this. It looks like it will pay for staff Going Forward permitting this. Weve wanted to encourage this for a long time. So, i think its well worth waiving the punitive fees to encourage doing this. I also want to point out that there is a sunset provision that allows for reinstating these after december of this year. December 21st. So, assuming that thats enough time to encourage all of these to be legal, its a little late starting. So we could always relook at that. But i think that thats an important thing to encourage quick action on their part and hope we can put this out as a press action so that people understand. Because theres 61 you know about. Well, theres a few weve done so far. Commissioner walker yeah. So, we want to education everyone in the city to take advantage of this for fire safety. [please stand by for captioner switch]. And then, miss elliott will send it to the state, and theyll get their papers. Okay. So if they dont do that, then, the fees dont get waived. Is that it . I hadnt thought about in th that i cant imagine them not thinking about this. Right. We have perfect. So we every operator who registered their activity will have a file. That file will be closed. That closure will indicate they are no longer involved in that activity or they are moving into that regulated space. Were tracking all of them very closely. Okay. Thank you. And you know this mostly deputy sweeney, and i think this is important this kind of in my opinion very good government, when you introduce new policies and stuff, sometimes, you just have to take help people to come out of the shadows and kind of pass legislation, and it might be other stuff that were looking at down the road, but its brought out at the staff meeting that sometimes these are necessary. I know they went out to do their job quite a bit of these operators had gotten permits, had done the work. They just didnt say it was for cannabis. But its important that its a clear message sent to staff, that what we ask them to do these, its its to bring them out of the shadows. We have a system that were doing every day. Its the same three inspectors. We get a lot of support from public health, Fire Department, and planning. Its going quite well, and i dont know how many total there are, but were certain on the path to get there. But you understand my point. Yes. Okay. Thank you. Commissioner walker vice chair walker. Either way. I move to support this legislation. Second. I have a motion and a second to approve this legislation. Is there any Public Comment . Seeing none, ill do a roll call vote. [ roll call. ] okay. Motion carries unanimously. Okay. Item 8, update regarding the permitting process on housing units, their edus. Okay. So weve this is i think its time that we had an update on this very Successful Program go ahead, deputy, and so i just wanted to invite and i thank everybody for coming, particularly the Fire Department and planning for coming here today to give us a global on how things are going. I think the program has been in place now have been out here over two years, is it . Correct. And the successes were seeing, and i just kind of bringing everybody to have a conversation about what weve learned from what weve approved, and maybe kind of read the tea leaves a little bit where we see we might have to improve or where were going to help some of the stakeholders Going Forward on their applications and the issues that theyre seeing if they do want to do this. Which i believe the feedback im getting from a lot of Property Owners, theyre saying this is one of the better housing policies thats come out of City Government in a long time. It has everybody involved, the private sector, and everybodys trying to create these housing and lead them here. Its a good housing policy that i want to make sure it gets all the vetting and help that it needs to make sure these are speedily approved as soon as possible. Okay. Thank you. Good morning, commissioners. Dan lowry, housing commissioners. Its all agencies that are involved here. And planning, dont forget planning. I didnt. Oh, did you say it . Planning. All right. What is an accessory dwelling unit . A residence unit thats added to an existing residential building. Adus are permitted citywide. Where can adus be added . In ordinance 16216, effective september 2016, adus made possible pernew programmed established in the last years have expanded areas of participation and creation of adus. Specific adu controls and local program. Within the existing building envelope, of a singlefamily home, and no waivers. Two, cannot take space from the existing units unless singlefamily home and no waivers. Three, number of adus allowed varies. Four, represent controlled if the existing building is rent controlled. Five cannot obtain administration waiver from some planning code requirement. Six, must meet San Francisco building and fire codes. I think the most important presentation is this flow chart. Okay. So this flow chart really spells out the process here of what to do here, so for for additional dwelling units for the ordinary ordinance is a [ inaudible ] we have a counter aide on the first floor [ inaudible ] and they have the form, so they have to submit a screening form, and its really, really important. Its on japgs for dbi and fire preapplication meeting. I think a lot of these issues in the future will be resolved in a preapplication meeting. I think its very, very important to have preapplication because every situation is different, and a lot of these issues that are creating problems later on down the line can be discussed and agreed upon at a preapplication meeting. So submit Building Permit application for adus with two sets of plans to street tree planning protection check list, the Planning Department, execute costs of hawkins agreement, and donating administration waiver of planning code requirements. Planning will be talking about that. Department of building inspection review, Fire Department review, and Building Permit issued. Building code requirements for legalization of dweelg units in the unit addition. Building code requirement for legalization of dwelling units and unit addition, minimum ceiling heights of bedrooms, living room, dining room, corridors of 76 percalifornia code 12082. 12. 08 is okay for kitchen, laundry rooms, storage rooms, and bathroom. Do not use a california residential credit. Natural light and ventilation is required for most rooms. Mechanical ventilation and artificial light allowed for kitchens, home offices, and media rooms perSan Francisco Building Code 12051. Not all rooms can be a bedroom. A bedroom requires an emergency escape and rescue window that leads to the public way or opens to a rear yard, 25 foot minimum depth perego sheet. 04. [ inaudible ] percalifornia Building Code 4202, and california Building Code 10201. When added or legalized, the Building Code does not exceed the number of allowed stories permitted by the cbc 5044. The legalized dwelling unit should not reduce the required number of exits from other units. Sprinkler requirements review, db information sheet se 05. We do have an information that both building and fired signed the se 05. For inspector requirements, a preapplication meeting with the Building Department and Fire Department is suggested for safety items that may not meet the letter of the code but meets the spirit of the code. Theres a lot of in that area, thats one of the main areas where an accessory dwelling unit may not be, where we have to use a code they use a code to their benefit, and we also have a unit information sheet that that per were trying to get parody. We do have an ss 05 information sheet that states the purpose of a dwelling unit. So thats the ss 05 and g23. Those both are currently signed by fire and by building. At the preapp meeting . Okay. Dbi suspends current notice of violation if the owner pursues legalization. This typically should not take up common area spaces previously enjoyed by tenants. Speak to the San Francisco rent board and consult with an attorney for more information. Your property will be reassessed after the unit and property taxes will be increased. Things to consider changing from a two unit building to three unit building places you in the jurisdiction. San francisco Housing Department and the San Francisco Fire Department and housing inspection, periodic fire inspection. It may be difficult to remove legalized units in the future. New street addresses are created after a permit for addition or legalization of dwelling unit is issued. President mccarthy emailed us a couple of questions that hed like to be respondent to today, and one of the questions is how many adus shall be approved since the introduction . Were proactive in the adu. We do track them weekly. We have a report weekly, and we try to work with our staff. We have sheets that breakdown all the adus. We try to trap them where they are to help them with the process. Total screening forms received so far year to date is 666. Total processed filed 5 6. Permit status permits issued is 109. Permit approved waiting for the owner to pickup is 23. Work completed is 23. Permits withdrawn, revised is 22. Permits undergoing plan review is 419. Undergoing planning review, under review by planning is 308. Under review by dbi, building mechanical is 49, under review by ppc and city agencies, San Francisco Fire Department, 14, dbi, 12, puc, three, permit processing center, one. No routing, owners have not paid fee is 32, so we do a weekly track of this to just to see where they are in the movement of this. So just, if i may, so 109 applications filed, right . Permitted issued is 109. Excuse me, permits issued. Okay. 23. Are done, finished. And i can assume the 109, the rest are underway. Correct. Okay. All right. And then and the 666 one more time is okay. The total screening forms. So people that just came in for the preapp. Are 666. The total permitted submits is 5 6. Thats pretty high succe thats pretty high after that. Yes. We have a weekly stat of what i just presented here. How many adus are on hold due to light safety, thats one of the questions that you had, and what i did, i went to Planning Department, jeff lay, i went to one of the supervisors in charge, hes overseeing where these projects are. I would say out of 49, theres 14 that are in review by mechanical right now, so that leaves us down to about 35, and about half of those are in hold due to exiting, and the other half are just other general comments that they have to comply with easements or other planning review comments here. Okay. Okay. And then so what are the projected number of adus that the city will be able to approve over the next couple of years . Were paying attention to these accessory dwelling units, and were tracking them weekly. Were also offered if an adu comes in, well offer over the counter service. So they could bring the plans to the fifth floor and go over the counter to expedite the process. Weve had several meetings with planning, with marselle, where theyre going to shell talk about it, where the koska hawkins agreement, and notice of special agreement takes a few months. What theyre going to do is approve these plans and send it over to building for our review for building and fire while theyre processing those applications, which could indicate three to four months. Were hoping itll stay that amount of time, so they can do the plan review and fire review, mechanical, where those paperworks is being done by planning, and planning will talk about that, and then, well move forward. Thank you, deputy, for your update on that. Okay. Yeah. So ill have yeah. Lets just stay close. Okay. And then ill just assume the data that you give us there, but its very informative. Thank you. Quick question here . How many units maximum units, singlefamily homes are allow index skbl they usually only allow one in a singlefamily home . Where you get over five on a sub story where its five or more units, its unlimited where it allows in the existing structure. Commissioner lee . Do we track my adus are in the multiple apartment buildings and which one right side from singlefamily homes . Planning will have a break done of that. If its a planning related question, somebody here from planning can talk. Obviously, commissioner, if you still want to ask the questions so why dont we hear from planning, and thank you, deputy director, for that data. Thank you. Good morning, commissioners. Thank you for the opportunity to speak today. I have some prepared comments, but im also available to answer some questions that you may have that i may not address today. Iing in the being setsory dwelling unit and legalization program, manage the staff, as well, so im going to speak a little about streamlining adus, and its overall permitting process at db i. Im going to give you i know that dan provided some overview of the program. Im going to give you a little overview as well from the planning perspective cause we look at this program as two programs. As you know in 2016, the citywide adu came into approval of an ordinance. Were trying to catch up, as well as make this publicly known to the public to keep everyone up to speed. So those changes really affected the planning code . And really breakdown and impact singlefamily homes versus kind of the multiunit buildings . Is and they really increase flexiblity for owners to add units and then increase flexiblity in where they can add the units. So really, planning is reviewing where exceptions can be made to the planning code and reviewing for dwelling unit quality as directed by the planning commission. So thats really our purview, and we give the health aleave e life safety to other agencies. On this property, one adu can be added to a singlefamily home with the exception they have to be planning code compliant, except one unit can be added move density, and no parking is required. So this is the component of really the legislation that brought us into compliance with state law. And so just to give you an idea of how the processing time is working out of planning, the current average approval time for planning staff to review the eligible permits is approximately 87 days out of planning. The legislation that ordinance 9517 allows is 117 days out of review and approval for planning. So as youre probably familiar, the planning code would require for any expansion, the neighborhood notification process, so for any projects that are undergoing expansion to add the adu, which this portion of the ordinance does allow, those have a longer timeline, so we are seeing some of those permits. Just doing a ruff calculation for this presentation, we have a small number of the singlefamily homes that are adding the adus right now. It looks like around about just over 30, and so were still kind of analyzing those because they have to be planning code compliant . Is still is something of figuring out to whether theyre actually going to need a waiver ever for some component of the planning code or whether or not they can work through ordinance number 9517. So there is a little bit of complexity with these, so just letting you know that sometimes they can take a little longer. But there is a lot of flexiblity for singlefamily homes to add adus. I can answer more questions about that or could you give us an example of what those waivers are needed i mean, why, because i would think sure. Yeah. So under the planning code, the five areas where the waivers can be granted or exception would be complexity, parking, rear yard, open space and reduced exposure, so under the planning code for lights, our definition of exposure, the glazing must be facing onto a compliance rear yard or onto a street or other type of large compliance open area . And under the adu area, that has been reduced to a 15 foot by 15 foot open horizontal area . So for some singlefamily homes, were finding on some small lots, you might have a legal nonconforming structure that is situated in its existing rear yard under the planning code and so maybe it just cant meet some of the requirements. So theres still the the availability for the singlefamily home to add the adu . Its just kind of what program its going to be able to participate in. So talk a little about the kind of other program we have. So this is the the kind of familiar program where multiunit buildings, but also singlefamily homes are participate, and so this is really the Citywide Program that became established in september 2016 . The current average approval timing in tlplanning for these dwellings which what we call the costa hawkins agreements, so these are approved un161216 and 161217, and this is the re area ill focus on. So justins planning, one highlight that weve been working on is really focused on the costa hawkins, our regulatory agreement, which is in the legislation for these adu projects. So weve stream lined some of these just back of house. You know, looking at how we work on our procedures, kind of internally and these require City Attorney review and signatures. So weve done some streamlining here and reduced the time frame for these from, like, months to weeks. Sometimes we have a week turnaround, which is pretty impressive, and this time frame is really for once we receive the signed and noterised costa hawkins agreement until we can return it to the owner. And then, following the costa hawkins agreement, in collaboration with tdi, as we created a new permit routing procedure where planning is starting to release the permits prior to receiving these recorded documents, and recorded documents, thats a new procedure weve developed which planning staff is still working concurrently on receiving the you know, working on the recorded document with the Property Owner, but it allows the permit to start being reviewed by the other agencies, so building, mechanical, fire, etcetera. And then, we just added a new step in the permit tracking that the permit will be routed back. We just check for recorded documents prior to permit issuance, so this is you know, weve just started this, i think less than a month ago, but ive just done some analysis, and looking at these initial stages, the release from planning has been reduced from about an average of 166 days to 68 days. So thats really shortening the review time of the permit. So again, this isnt full permit issuance, but its really reducing the life of the permit overall, so its reducing down the line overall at a faster rate. We think this is a huge improvement thus far . And its been a collaborative process working with dbi on this. Could i just interject one thing. Yeah. Particularly under 161217, are you seeing a particular average size that youre seeing on that in. When i do the calculation, because we do have one unit and kind of two unit, i think the average size the average number of adus per permit is somewhere around two, but we see the range of one to nine. Okay. And then lastly, id just like to talk about an up coming process improvement that we i think dan lowry also may have directed. In this plan, the Planning Department has outlined our past towards a faster approval for Housing Development projects at both entitlement and post entitlement permitting issues, so both the adu and legalization permits are called out. Currently, planning staff is working through the plans implementation, and then, one item i thought was really important to todays discussion is the development of an appointment based over the counter review process for adu and legalization permits. And so the objective really is to facilitate a more efficient review plan. Well have staff at the planning counter desks, and so itll allow applicants to make an appointment to get over the counter review due to their required recorded documents for these, we wont be able to do dual approvals, but we will be able to did kind of a soft approval and give kind of final comments with our, you know, trained staff who focus only on these types of permits. And so it also provide a time frame a known time frame for applicants, so we think thatll be a huge improvement. So were anticipating a launch first water of this soon, which were in february , so thats coming up soon. So thats you know, thats where i think we are. I wanted to talk a little about the fact i know dan lowry mentioned in dbi permits about 300 are in planning. I just wanted to give a little background on that. Last year there were two amendments to kind of the overall adu program, with that, it allowed some flexiblity to permits that are currently on file at planning. And so with that, it ayllowed Property Owners to rethink their project. It would potentially allow the increase of the number of units . It would allow projects that are undergoing mandatory or voluntary size minimum under the 80094 program to add ad unlimited amount of units to the lot. It also changed the calculation to prior, the legislation had read you would calculate the number of units by building, by ordinance 16217 changed that you would calculate number of units by lot, so for some projects, that would change how they would calculate number of units, number of adus to be added. It also just changed where you could add the adus. So a lot of projects are you know, actually in that process of thinking how theyre going to be adding the projects, adding the adus to their project. So i just wanted to kind of give some numbers that about 260 of those permits that are still under review at planning were submitted kind of august 2017 or earlier, so those were all submitted prior to that last Amendment Ordinance number 16217. So i wanted to give some background to that number, and about 31 of those permits are kind of the singlefamily home that were processing through the ordinance number 9517. Commissioner warshell, please. Two questions. The first one is really getting to the how many of these are singlefamily homes. Adding one unit, it would seem that knowing San Franciscos Housing Stock, that would be the dominant thing. If you have any data on that, that would be useful. The second one is almost like your seismic upgrade question, you know, one of the programs that, you know, i think has been tremendous has been when seismic upgrades are done and soft story garage buildings, when they convert them to apartments and theyre subsidized or below market rate, permanently affordable, there are financial incentives to do that, and theyre quite good, and many owners have taken advantage of them and theres been a tremendous benefit from that. So i was just wondering, are there financial benefits, you know, that can be identified that, you know, in particular, complement this program of the seismic upgrade. But in particular, what i was thinking about, you know, youd mentioned if a building is rent controlled already, then, the new units also will be rent control. Clearly, it doesnt cost any less for the owner to do it than in a market race situation. Is there any financial incentive or should there be any financial incentive to not only get more housing in the Housing Stock but more Affordable Housing that youre aware of . So maybe let me answer the first question and then ill come back to the second one and see if i can help shape what i think your question okay. May be focused around. So for the single for the adus that be being added to singlefamily dwellings, the number that i calculated were around 30, 31 permits that seemed to be on file currently and i believe weve approved three out of the Planning Departments. So the ordinance came into effect last june, ordinance 9517 that created the local program for singlefamily homeowners to add adus to their home in a simple, easy way thats laid out in our code. Prior to that, there was state law from january 2017 that homeowners could utilize to add adus. So there was the availability, but they had to use state law. So with that, you know, i believe that numbers quite low. I believe there are more singlefamily homeowners who would be interested in adding adus . So two things, we do have also the legalization program, which currently has, i would say a good number of those i dont actually know the number offhand. Unfortunately, i could come back later, and we could talk about that number. But i do know a good number of the legalization permits are legalizing a good number of those singlefamily homes, and there are a good number of those on file. We can talk about it as a separate unit, but theyre kind of legalizing that being assessory dwelling units, so i think really more singlefamily homeowners have been participating in the accessory dwelling unit program. But with that, planning has received a grant from the friends of city planning to undertake a Community Outreach program, which we anticipate doing hopefully this summer . Which would be focused on adus, the singlefamily homes, going out to all the supervisororial districts and doing presentations and outreach to really focus on what the needs of sipping will family homeowners might be as far as education and how to get started. We do get a lot of questions on how to get started . So really, you know, doing some kind of informational interviews first to figure out what the needs might be, and then doing that type of outreach. So first question. Second question, i may lets im not sure i fully grasped what the question was, so maybe lets think through. So under the adu program, the if the project is what we consider a rental unit, and receives any of the waivers, so any of the exceptions through the planning code, the new adus would be restricted to rent control through that costa hawkins agreement, our regulatory agreement. So thats kind of the law 69 land as it of the land as it stands . So thats the current status. I believe your question may have been is there a way or is there an intent to potentially restrict them to a below market rate or im not sure. You may have to refrain that. Are there any financial incentives to either assist people who are doing below market rate or rent control or even having an option as youre putting in the unit by making it permanently affordable to receive some sort of subide see . Offhand, im not sure, but thats something i can work with the legislative Department Staff at planning to make some considerations and do some research on that topic . Absolutely, yeah, i can make that click. Thank you. Okay. Did you want to finish your thoughts . No. Actually, thats my thoughts. Im happy to answer any questions you may have. I have a few. Obviously, planning is very clear, bullish on this program because youre constantly and adapting here. Just a few quick questions. Sure. In regards to applications, are you learning a lot what kind of applications might even though it would fit your profile, tick your boxes, but you might see you might have some trouble later on when it enters the dbi world that it might exist, and do you discuss that with the applicants at the time, and are we basically, are we doing a good enough job saying this is not in stone here; we might run into some issues later on down that you need to be aware of before you go spend a lot of money and then find out that you cant do it . Are we having that kind of yeah. I think thats a great question. Don lowry pointed out that preapplication meetings are extremely helpful . We recommend them at planning . Because we once a project spends time in planning, it goes through the next steps, and we see we see many revisions at planning . Sometimes revisions that reconfigure two things. They reconfigure the visible facade which requires some preservation review under our requirements under ceqa or change the number of units. And some of these issues we see just like anecdotally are due to egress requirements, due to kind of pg e gas room requirements, and so this is you know, number one, it could be reducing the number of units, which is kind of not meeting the intent of the program. Number two, due to the requirements of the recorded documents, it is also extending the life of the permit review time because we have to rerecord all documents. Right. So i think, you know, for both of these, you know, there i think theres a lot wrapped up in there, but theres just some kind of off the cuff frequent concerns were seeing. So yeah, and so is there a conversation going on i mean, you probably are forced out the gates when youre dealing with this and understanding that issue, is there a conversation going on on how we should, as a unified approach to these type of ones that we predict problems later on down the line, now that weve kind of been doing this for almost two years now, is there a any game plan in place involved in how we should address those properties that just might not make it, you know, for one reason or another . You know. A game plan . Well, i guess i mean, i know the goal here is to try and make it happen, but sometimes, i feel that we cannot, you know, because of the nature of the building. It might be in the middle of the block. The gas issue is a new one. I can see how that could trigger off historical, like you pointed out, but gas rooms, the green book requirements, if you move an existing condition, youve got to do it in the new one. And not to mention, pg e might say absolutely not. So i know unfortunately, you wont find that answer out until everything has gone through the whole process, so im just wondering on whats the state of mind of these people when they do try to put in the application, you know . Yeah. To be frank, were all even within planning, were balancing a whole lot of policies, and i think every agency is balancing a whole lot of policies, so i dont think there is one simple answer to this . You know, the permit process as it exists, its a linear process . Its not a one comprehensive review process . So i dont know if i have a one one answer game plan to that. Do you have a lot of applicants coming back upset with you guys because theyve run into that down the road further down the road . Anecdotally . I guess a lot of emails from architects who are frustrated, and some of the frustration comes from they dont know how to advise their clients . Currently right now, there is lack of guidance coming from whats happening at the other agencies . So the frustration stems from not knowing when to file, not knowing what the answer is going to be on where they the number of adus that can be placed, where the adus can be placed in the building. Yeah. What will need to happen as far as corridors or the pg e gas meter rooms, so theres theres a lot of unknowns. Yeah, but i think the moral of the story is maybe we should be looking at this preapplication, like the deputy was talking about, at the very start i use the words face our did he mondaemons when it E Construction industry, and maybe we should be doing 134g about th something about that. I really appreciate your update from the Planning Department. And your timelines, i wish i could get those on some of my projects. Building some adus. All right. Thank you. Thank you. So next, fire marshal. Thank you. Good morning, commissioners. Thank you for the invitation. Always happy to speak before the Building Commission and or the Building Department our partners. We see them as our partners. I would just like to say dan lawry laid out a very good process. It makes a lot of sense, and its a very good process. I thought he did a good job laying that out. Id like to just respond to our Planning Department. Were talking about waivers, that may work with the Planning Department. The Fire Department cannot waive fire code requirements. Its basically straight law. We cannot be less restrictive than state law, so id like to put that out there. The other thing id like to mention as i begin, and ill be brief, were all for additional housing, but at some point, when we get started with, its worth taking a pause to remind ourselves why we have building and fire codes. I know we all know this, but its worth mentioning. Its because over the centuries, weve had loss of life and property. We all know thats how thats evolved. Its just worth reminding ourselves that as we move forward. Were all for additional housing. We want that, but we want safe housing. Id like to briefly talk about scope and jurisdiction. So as with you e all know, the on a three year cycle. The government adopts standards from the International Building and fire code. It becomes the California Building and fire code. The local jurisdiction from the Fire Departments perspective asks to or adopts the california code with amendments, local amendments, in San Francisco that meets challenges of San Francisco due to topo graphy, geographic cal challenges, requirements. We can be more restrictive, we cannot be less restrictive, so again, when were talking about waivers, thats outside. When were talking about adus, lets talk about adus. First of all, are we talking about r3, one and two family dwelling units, or are we talking about rus. R3, Planning Department jurisdiction. R2, Fire Department jurisdiction. The onus, when an applicant comes in and has a proposal for an adu, the onus to meet code and the requirement falls on the Design Professional, falls on the architect of record, engineer of record, etcetera. I cannot agree more with my colleagues here about the necessity for a preapplication process. Thats where we sit down, the Design Professional comes forward, lays his or her plans out and says yes, this is my design scope. I meet code from a to z, or no, i cant meet it in certain areas. Its the onus of the Design Professional to bring that forward to our attention. As the authority having jurisdiction, we look at that and say, okay. What is your proposal . How do we meet the intent . Can we meet the intent . Can you give us an enhancement that offsets the deficiency that you cannot comply with . That thats what we ask, and thats where it becomes subjective, and i understand the differing opinions. When the Fire Department looks for an enhancement to offset the deficiency, we look at it through the lens of the Fire Department and our experience with fires. We understand how fires, how buildings perform in fires, how they affect our egress system, how they affect our Fire Department access, etcetera. So when we are looking at an equivalency or some kind of enhancement, were saying okay, from our experience, and our expertise being in a fire, are those occupants of this building, are they going to be as safe as if you meet the letter of the code. And we as the Fire Department when it falls under our jurisdiction has to look at that. We try to apply it consistently and fairly as much as possible. Ultimately, were looking out for the safety of the occupants of the building. Challenging with adus, ill just give you a couple scenarios that ive run into. Its rescue windows, access to rescue windows, and egress. So when the applicant wants to use the single entrance exception, and they do not meet the travel distance requirement, so if they go beyond 75 feet or you go up to 125 i dont want to get in the weeds too much here, theres requirements where you can go beyond is 25 feet if youre fully sprinkleered . We brought up proposals first of all, let me say, weve taken a little criticism on some of our proposals. The onus is not on the Fire Department to design these for the applicant. We partner with Building Department and the applicant to try to work through this to get to where we can all have a good a safe structure. So if the point being, if the applicant meets the code, he can he or she can round file our fire safety sheets, info sheets, abs, etcetera. They can round file it. If they want to find an alternative, we give them a path. Rescue windows, is a rescue window truly a rescue window if the Fire Department cant put a ladder to it . Is a rescue window truly a rescue window if the occupant cannot selfrescue . Is a rescue window truly a rescue window if i cant make it to the public way if im still in the building . These are the questions we have to answer, and these are the challenges that we face, and these are the solutions, and we try to find solutions to that, to our solutions to that. Nfa13 as opposed to 234 fa13, we look the aall these enhancements to ensure that that one point of access or egress will always be there in the event of a fire. And then lastly without digging too much into the code, id like to say this. I think the process is not being followed property, and when i say that is, when an applicant comes forward, and our plan reviewers makes comment makes a comment, a requirement or so, and you, as the applicant, you either disagree with that comment its not required by code, disagree with the interpretation, or want to propose an alternative, the solution is to go to his or her officer in a chain of command, request a meeting to have a discussion, and send it up the chain. And they cant resolve it through the captain, assistant fire marshal, i will get resolved. If i cant resolve it with my team, then, the applicant can go to the state fire marshal and request interpretation. Thats the process, and we would allied by any interpretation of the state fire marshals office. Ive seen a couple emails fly around where the applicant kind of glows arouoes around that pd goes right to the Building Department, can you help with this . Youre unilaterally making these requirements, etcetera. That is not the case, and im not going to speak to details of emails. But the emails that i have seen, i am not aware of those applications. So again, the process is not being followed properly, and i think we could head off a lot of these problems if it was followed properly. And im happy to answer any questions that you may have. Thank you, fire marshal. If if i may, i have a few questions. Absolutely. And i you stress about getting into the weeds. I would never dare get into the weeds with the fire marshal. All right. Im just talking about in the spirit of the conversation, and terminologies you use of less restrictive codes. Yeah. Partnership was a big one that kind of jumped out at me, and im glad you said it, because this is a partnership. With regard to the adus, now that weve kind of i think one thing thats coming out, and the feedback im geding,s getting, as well, is its a very Successful Program, and its a great option to provide housing in existing structures, and looking at these numbers, please correct me if i am wrong if im wrong, but were looking at well over 1,000 units that could be produced without having to go to the taxpayer. Its an incentive for the existing Property Owner to improve their properties and in many cases bring their properties up to code. As i look at the numbers, like lets just say we had almost 109 that were approved, right . And then right now, weve got, i think lets say 50, round up numbers that are sitting there. The question that i have is and im not saying, fire marshal, that i i think youre right now in fire, theres Something Like 14 or 15. Which is a pretty good number. Yeah. Well, its a pretty good number. The question i have it now that we know what we know, the kind of resistance were getting, just maybe as i was saying, facing our demons, theres certain procedures we can follow as a department, and that could be a mechanical scenario. It could be right down to the exiting issue, but it seems to me that there seems to be a pattern of a type of building that we seem to be putting into the department that probably will never be able to get out of there because of its, you know, for example, lets say the exiting issues for you. And im hearing that the ones that keep coming back a lot are these dual exiting, not going to the 125. Lets say they were the small what we would know as the workmans entrance. Yeah. That seem to be a lot of the issues. And so some of the resolutions that are forwarded there as to solve it for example, lets say, we might have to do double shoot rock for fire exiting, i think its sprinkleer, so on. The corridor might be kind of narrow. We might have to relocate the gas room, and so on. They could be potentially financially so burdensome and time on the property, we probably are we better off telling these people up front that rather than going through the process, chances are unless youre willing to pay a lot of extra money and getting a lot of extra approval, that we shouldnt be approving these applications. Two things. I think it should be a preapp that would include building, planning, and all that at once. You bring everyone on at once and say is this a feasible project . I think that would go a long way. Im hesitant, when we talk about when we refer to the Fire Department making these calls, you need this, you need that. Earlier to my point, when i first got up here, the onus is on the Design Professional. The Design Professional should be thoroughly knowledgeable of the code and understand what he or she should not do. And the trades men, thats a nonrated passage. So if i cant get, by code and again, we cannot be less restrictive, if i cannot get from the most remote area of my adu to the public rightofway within 75 feet, i need a secretary exit or you can give me a rated passage way to an exit, and i can rate the entrance of that. If youre talking feasiblity, i can talk feasiblity. The code doesnt allow it. Lets take it a step further. Trades man, im going to have trash cans in there, gas meters, as well, and thats going to be my only exit for the people that im putting in my building and far deep into the lot . We have to look at that, as well. So i think to sum it up, one size doesnt fit all here, and its a case by case, and we have to look at it case by case. Head off a lot of these problems, Early Intervention, and Early Intervention means preapp, with all involved, would go a long way. So if i may finish, can i ask you something and this kind of talks to the less restrictive, and i think i know the answer to this, but i just wanted to see if i am going down the wrong rabbit hole here on this. If i do have workmans entrance that might make it, right, we can fireproof it, we can make it, out of one to ten in your world, an eight, that was never there before. Where obviously an eight is better than nothing. Right. Where does those type of decisions fall for the department . So theres a process for alltive means and methods. How do we meet the code . Is the intent to have a one who are . Two hour . How can i physically do it . Can i not physically access both sides of the wall. Theres a process Building Code alternative means and methods. Fire can be part of that discussion, and yes, were open to that. Again, with the measurement in our mind, in our mind, with the approach we have to answer, are we do we meet the intent, if the intents for one hour, if the intents for two hour, do i meet the equivalency, and thats the question we have to answer. To just say hey, its close enough, thats the wrong path to go down. The path is what is required, what are you giving us, where is the deficiency, how do