Transcripts For SFGTV Special Building Inspection Commission 32917 20170401

Item on the agenda is roll call. President mccarthy. Here. Vice president walker. Here. Commissioner gilman. Here. Commissioner lee. Here. Commissioner warshell. Here. Commissioner commissioner clinch and commissioner konstin are excused. We have a quorum and our next item is item 2. Discussion and possible action regarding a proposed ordinance board of supervisors file no. 170202 amending the Green Building code to establish requirements for installation of electric Vehicle Charger infrastructure in New Buildings or buildings under going major alterations in addition to other requirements. Good morning and thank you. Thank you to my fellow commissioners for such a Quick Response in putting this meeting together. I believe some of you commissioners were not here last week on this particular item, commissioner gilman and commissioner warshell so its great that youre here this morning. We have in front of us a great piece of legislation that is on a fast track to hopefully be introduced to the supervisors board by april i believe, not knowing the full details which we can go into further. It was presented last week. Its obviously a really good piece of legislation. The spirit of what its trying to do i dont think anybody could argue with it and where this whole you know electric car and charging in the private sector and going and had a great conversations with some of stakeholder between now and then and everyone agrees. We had questions and queryos the legislation that we wanted to clear up and thanks to everybody they got together at the Mayors Office and clarify the issues that we needed implemented in the legislation as it goes forward so with that i would like to turn it over to madam secretary whoever is is it barry that is going to speak first . Supervisor. I know shes a busy woman so all right. Thank you so much. Good morning supervisor and welcome. Thank you so much commissioners to have this special meeting to consider this exciting piece of legislation in San Francisco. I wanted to be here to thank the Mayors Office and our staff and barry and our director debbie and jesse and Gilmer Rodriguez and everyone who worked so hard trying to address Climate Change issues, sustainability and how it is that we can reduce the Greenhouse Gas emissions and i think what has been produced and that is before you is really i think an elegant way to address this moving forward and to really push and continue to allow for the demand for electric vehicles especially from people who live in San Francisco, and just by way of background how i became really interested in working on this. I live in a multiunit building. I dont have charging infrastructure in my building and i would love to drive an electric vehicle and i think so many residents in San Francisco are faced with this same exact situation but were seeing in the market that demand is only going to increase. People are interested in riding electric vehicles and if you have infrastructure there i believe the demand will grow as well. I got many inquiries about public charging station and i am working on legislation to change over our city fleet to become also for light duty vehicles 100 electric by the year 2020 and so these are that will be before you as well later on next month but i just want to say we certainly heard a lot of good feedback around this legislation, but i would say overall this is the way to go to continue to push our consumers to go towards a more to provide a cleaner choice when theyre actually considering what type of vehicle theyre going to buy. Right now everyone pretty much thinks im going to go and buy a gasoline powered car and they dont think twice. We want to give them the opportunity to think twice over their decision and so i think that San Francisco should absolutely be leading the way on this effort especially when so much innovation and technology is happening right here and developed in the bay area so again i really am just here to thank all the staff who have been working hard on this legislation and hope we can all figure out a way to ik make this feible for all parties and together we can become a more sustainable city and world thank you so much so. Thank you supervisor. Good morning. Tyrone and the Senior Adviser for mayor lee and wanted to echo the comments and in face of the announcements yesterday by the federal government and will aring back initiatives trying to clean up our emissions in the United States legislation smart legislation like this is even more necessary because when we look at emissions data 70 are from the major urban cities so for us we need to continue to pushing on this front and i want to thank the leadership of president mccarthy for sitting down trying to work through these issues and director and the staff for working on us trying to develop legislation that works. It may not be quite perfect but offers a road map for improvements how we get to perfect in the future and thats what we have to strive for especially when it come to the the environment and Climate Change and thank the staff of the environment and building inspection and supervisor tang and everyone working on this legislation to bring it to this point so now i will turn it over to barry and go over a few of the amendments on the ordinance to get it on the record and discuss whatever questions you have so thank you. Thank you tyrone. Good morning members of the commission. Thank you for your time. As i gave a pretty long presentation to prior meeting we will get right to the point. The prior proposal oh i do have a slide was in summary a requirement for New Buildings and certain major alterations to have sufficient electric capacity to simultaneously charge electric vehicles at 20 Parking Spaces and in addition to run a full circuit to 10 of those spaces so that and would term that a turn key electric vehicle charging space because that the item is missing that is the electric Vehicle Charger. The second element was a requirement that 10 of the spaces either receive the same treatment full circuit or empty conduit if necessary and the option for the empty conduit running the full length was to provide flexibility which has been a theme of the ordinance for perhaps upgrading the amperage and some vehicles might be better served by a higher one than the minimum requirement although the minimum is copattible with all vehicles today and the third is ensure that the building had enough space for the electric equipment to extend the charging up to 100 of spaces and last an observation that fast charging would be a good option to ensure there is a trade off. The revisions based on considerable Stakeholder Feedback in the last week that we recommend that you consider are of course the same framework of ordinance but minor revisions so the same 20 electrical system capacity. The same 10 of spaces being fully turn key so a full circuit from the drkz distribution infrastructure to the parking space with the receptacle and eliminating though the second 10 that could be empty conduit and its a straightforward set of infrastructure that could be built out periodically over the life of the building or at new construction if the parties involved determine that is necessary to meet current tenant demand. You would still we got more specific about that we need to ensure there are spaces specifically install additional Electrical Panels and distribution infrastructure within the building as well as to have either sleeves or conduit so a sleeve just being a straightforward pen traigdz penetration where its more difficult to run it through the wall or other partition and last dbi would maintain a list of buildings subject to these requirements and that might be as simple as we just understand what the triggers are for the ordinance and we might have straightforward Online Access to existing resources, but all the same we need to it ties into the next item that we want to make sure that the infrastructure is put to use and so we suggest adding a requirement in the environment code, not at department of Building Inspections responsibility but environment to enforce the occupancy, the owner or the Homeowners Association and notifies all tenants in the building yearly there is additional capacity for electric Vehicle Charger and they know that the resource is available and best chance of putting to use. In addition a separate issue came up that in particularly in the valuable classive buildings and small residential in fill it can be impractical to have the transformer that maybe required in some instances located within the building and where its required and necessary and where it is infeasible to locate the transformer in the building based on the setbacks and other considerations then the preferable and necessary place would be i sidewalk vault. Of course the department of public works has for a number of reasons want encouraged sidewalk vaults for some years and this is a Building Code, so the temporary fix the maximum that can fit in this ordinance is a note encouraging public works to support sidewalk vaults in these circumstances where its necessary and acknowledging the importance of electric Vehicle Infrastructure as a policy priority for San Francisco. In addition theres some discussion about what is the specific level of detail necessary for Electrical Engineering for the Small Projects . And thats a consideration of the department of building inspection that is really separate from the specifics of the ordinance but the way the ordinance was written before when it came to you encountered that discussion so what were recommending is deleting a few words that didnt exist that were amendments that are not necessarily necessary that were in the state code and reverting to this language on the screen which is construction documents and then add this phrase anything Electrical Engineering related documents shall indicate so that word related is intended to provide suitable flexibility for the department of building inspection to determine the appropriate level of documentation based on the project size. Last just where is that . Can you point to which in the legislation its in there . That would be sorry to do that to you. I thought you had it in front of you. So the place that was it would be repeated by the way a few times but a good example yeah. Is 4. 1 lines one and 22 there is a red text about 17 or more units and that was a thats text were suggesting withdrawing all together. One more time. So page eight of the document lines 21 and 22 which are section 4. 106. Two. One which suggests moving all of the red text in that amendment on that line and going back to the original language that starts with the word construction. Construction document shall propose the ev spaces and the reason for the change so the 17 or more is removed . Yeah. And were looking at the one that wasnt changed and shall indicate the number of spaces. Yeah, its referring back to the code that didnt mention those and engineering and thats because this section deals with preparation for disabled access and so it was unnecessary to have that concept introduced in this section, and then the location to have that phrase Electrical Design related documents is in addition that is not reflected in your version but would fit on the section that begins in the last line of page ten, line 25 and mostly contained on page 11 which is in that section and multiple spaces required so that would be the opening phrase to that will be construction document it is including Electrical Design and initialing documents shall indicate. Thank you barry. I have a couple more suggestions from the department of public works but i could take more questions. Okay. So the department of public works has raised a couple of other questions which are relate to the intent of the ordinance is really if new Motor Vehicle parking is constructed we should ensure to provide electricity to those spaces and they pointed out that the language of the ordinance is potentially a little over broad thats its ambiguous and apply to where buses are stored and other use not intended so its the recommendation to add a definition of a light duty vehicle and a passenger vehicle based on common u. S. Department of transportation definitions to the ordinance so that in that adding that definition allows references later just to clarify that the point of this is where parking is provided that thats where the electric Vehicle Infrastructure needs to be. They also suggest in the non residential section, section five. 103. Three. Three clarifying that the applicability is to striped parking lots as well as parking garages for commercial buildings, and they suggest because the ordinance extend it requires all spaces to be ev spaces so to meet the definition of what an electric vehicle ready space is per state code that does include some slope requirements and they suggest adding an feasibility suggestion and limit the applicability of that slope requirement where necessary. And thats concludes the suggested additions. Commissioner gilman. [inaudible] [off mic] yeah, if you want to ask barry if its technical this is the man here. Barry or trevor im not sure and is there exemption for one heard Affordable Housing and we have layered costs that make it incredible expensive to build and i would extrapolate residents in the buildings and homeless and earning less than the total and buy parking and we purchase parking and they remain vacant and [inaudible] to Affordable Housing development. Sure Affordable Housing developers were the first stakeholders that we spoke with and you know we had a very good discussion and as well we had with the green lining institute and environment california and the California Housing Partnership coalition so also and of course the Housing Action coalition of San Francisco. The response across the board was one, we went what the incremental costs would be and that has been a subject of discussion and the bottom line if you have a very small number of Parking Spaces the cost is quite low and we demonstrated that in a lot of detail, and where theres been contention about the ordinance is where projects might be allowed to produce a large amount of parking where costs can be very different, and in so second there was the observation that if Affordable Housing doesnt have this type of infrastructure then youre insuring that the residents of those buildings would not have access to this type of clean transportation and so it actually all parties did agree it makes sense to apply to Affordable Housing and last you know the pragmatic level there is a limited amount of parking that is built at all so thats the bottom line. [inaudible] [off mic] commissioner walker please. Thank you so much for this. Its such an important part of the infrastructure that needs to be paid attention to. In looking at this, and maybe its even a possible solution for what gait was talking about when we have for instance like a public arts fee that attaches to a building they can either put up public art or put it into a fund to fund sort of more Community Infrastructure around art. And it might be a good thing to look at smaller buildings that go up and a fee that would attach or an option if a building doesnt have full access that they put into a fund that could fund maybe a public station in the same area similar to what we do with our arts requirement you know just something to look at as a funding for funding more public stations or allowing these private one to be used publicly for a benefit back to the owner or something, just a thought about incentives. There is some complexity of course to your suggestion but the spirit of is actually in here and on page 6 and continued from page five the section that just clarifies the applicability of this ordinance to both residential new construction and to major alterations lists several exceptions, and exception number one starting on line 12 is specifically for major alt altseration alterations and evidence and present a hardship and the director would have an ability to consider appeal to provide an exemption sorry to reduce the number of ev spaces required so its no longer a hardship or provide for charging elsewhere, so that discretion to negotiate is in there, but we didnt have without necessarily creating a large formal process. We do expect circumstances where its needed to be fairly narrow. Yeah. I mean it would be because if you have a station at a 50 unit building it serves them but not necessarily serve the broader and it might be interesting to look at that how you can broad ep the use. This is also looking at one element of a much broader system so youre absolutely on point so theres a lot of effort to work toward provision and improving just ability to provide electric vehicle charging to the public at city parking garages which have been the leaders often but face challenges in expanding that infrastructure currently partly because they werent built with this concept in mind and for other reasons as well, and then also theres robust discussion on better provision of more widespread and how to potentially provide electric vehicle charging at curb side or other public locations in addition to Public Parking garages but thats not the Building Code so its would be a different got it. Thank you. Commissioner gilman. And i apologize again i wasnt here at last meeting and this question and this legislation moves forward and adopted by the board of supervisors. Where is the project in the planning cycle now and they filed their [inaudible] but havent gotten it yet and how does it affect San Francisco construction . Sure so the state law is ambiguous and in the data code and for the ferment determines the publicity of all codes and that can include a application for site permit here in San Francisco. It might be for the fellow commissioners who werent here last time and tell us the time frame when you see it implemented would be helpful . Most likely june given the provided that the commission were to make a determination today, and the board of supervisors is i believe considering the the Land Use Committee is considering reviewing it on april 10 so continues through the process into the summer. Okay. All right. I think thats it. Thank you barry for the presentation this morning. I guess we also have a representative from dpw that came out at the last moment and dari talked about was this transformer situation which you know in to give you why dont you introduce yourself for the record. Good morning. Edgar lop ez for public works. Thank you mr. Lopez for coming out this morning but with regard to the transformer we had talked to a lot of contractors over the last week and that was the big one that kind of you know resonated with this legislation, and i think its probably a Good Opportunity and all were having is a conversation here this morning, and its great to have somebody of high ranking of dpw and we could set the table as it were for future discussions and one of the challenges and the smaller lots in the center blocks or lots traditional to smaller developments which could be anywhere 25, 50 units depending, and theres a lot of regulation that has to be followed particularly the pg e one is a difficult one and the green book legislation and a lot of the options that are open to them that you have to put this transformer within the building and you know its constantly evolving in the Building Code and changing and the means of egress now is a lot more sophisticated and a lot of criteria to meet so a percentage of any given building must go to life safety issues and so on as it should be, so traditionally and if not most of the times you know there isnt the feasibility to put the transformers within these projects and now i understand we have the option to apply and go through the process of dpw but it seems that sometimes the marker is you got to figure it out if youre doing a new building so were not issuing transformers because we need to see that when we basically can and with all the codes changing and our demands being ramped its hard to meet these criteria so the conversation would be particularly when trying to do the right thing here and this is definitely the way of the future, the electric vehicle, the charging and its taking up more room and more demand in our space. Were trying to work with you to facilitate a more easier process in the application to kind of say if youre meeting these criterias and demonstrating this is one of those sites its more automatic format that its given rather than lets go through the three, four month going back and forth and looking and when we know we will come to the same end result so that is some of the experiences they talked to some of the other contractors that its already obvious that we cant achieve that goal but go through three, four months now i know we have a seasoned commissioner familiar with dpw policy and i am looking forward how we will weigh in and more of a conversation and everyone do the right thing and as a department make that step easier for the Development Community easy dwrer when designing the buildings. Im sorry. Commissioner lee. Can i add one thing and what we were discussing at the last meeting and i ails did ask the also did ask the presenters to reach out to pg e, the Utility Company because it takes their cooperation to locate power for these projects, and sometimes theyre involved in deciding where the transformers should go. Its not just public works but pg e if youre in a corner lot pg e this is where i want to bring the power into the building. Thats the only location. Theyre stubborn about it sometimes and did we reach out to them and we need your cooperation and do negotiation and maybe a compromise on i location so that public works doesnt have to say oh no you cant put it there and pg e says yes, you have to. What can be done . Great question. Mr. Lopez. [laughter] i wouldnt be going too far. Go ahead. Well first of all thank you for the opportunity to be before you. President mccarthy you raised lots of valid points and were supportive of the ordinance and the amendments to the Green Building code and we would be happy to be participant and provide leadership and getting with the other agencies to figure out how can we be more supportive and streamline the process for these approvals when theyre necessary. We realize its you know sometimes might be technically infeasible to put them inside the building and we want to be helpful and part of the solution and we welcome the opportunity to work with the other agencies and the Utility Companies as well and happy to figure out an organized way to create a task force that specifically addresses this. I dont think we could ask anymore and administratively language and implemented to the code and administratively. Yeah. And a certain process. Did you want to yeah. Tyrone, Senior Adviser for mayor lee and they are aware of the ordinance and they have plans with that and this is in line with that. As far as the specific conversations and the transformers and the sizing and that conversation hasnt happen but great to bring them together with public works and have the conversation together. Okay. I appreciate that. Couldnt ask for anymore than that at this point. Okay. If there is no more comment from our panel for everybody coming out this morning. We will open to Public Comment. Is that correct madam secretary. Yes, i have Public Comment on item 2. Yeah. Good morning commissioners, president mccarthy, director, joel [inaudible] director of Sustainability Solutions for the San Francisco Electrical Construction industry. Im also a part time planning commissioner on thursdays. Thanks for hearing my comments today. I dont want to belabor the points i made two weeks ago. I wanted to touch on a couple broad aspects of the ordinance. In spirit this is where we are moving as a city. We have our Public Transportation infrastructure is to the extent it can be fully electric or hybrid. We are as a city promoting less people driver cars and more walking and taking public transit, driving emissionless vehicles and proud to call this city home because of its progressiveness and this is just another way were trying to set a trend and stand out as a city, so you know in spirit like i said the fact is less people are driving cars. More people are walking, bicycles and Public Transportation. More people are driving are driving hybrids and electric vehicles. I mentioned a Development Two weeks ago in which regular Parking Spaces are vacant and not being purchased and the electric vehicle vead ready stations are sold out and purchased by people that dont have electric vehicles yet and the trend is definitely headed towards people that will have a car its an electric vehicle so makes a lot of sense you know planning and you know looking forward and also construction wise i am not able to speak for pg e or dpw but with construction experience i can speak to that and when youre on a job site building a building it behooves you to always put as many conduits and raceways in the slap that you can. Theyre hidden. It takes less time to install them and the material itself is cheaper, so if im a job site i am running all the lighting and power and whatever i can in the slab in the concrete just because its more feasible so this follows that spirit as opposed to doing things the wrong way completing a building and then coming in after the fact when people want their charging stations and say oh we should have done this before. Thank you. Thank you commissioner. Thank you for your comments and thank you for your work on this. You have been helpful in our meetings so thank you. Is there anymore Public Comment . I see none. So madam secretary. Then you need a motion on the item. Commissioner walker please. Move to approve. Second. Okay. There is a motion and a second. I will do a roll call vote on the item. President mccarthy. Yes. Vice president walker. Yes. Commissioner gilman. Yes. Commissioner lee. Yes. And commissioner warshell. Yes. Okay. The motion carries unanimously. Okay. Our next item is adjournment. Is there a motion to adjourn . Move to adjourn. Second. Thank you commissioners and thank you all for coming out. We are now adjourned. It is 10 40 a. M. Thank you. clapping. in 2013 San Francisco legislators newsom agreed to allow the reciprocate of our soft story buildings those building house one and 20 thousand resident a program of that collect requires extensive outreach and this continuation of that process who is here and bill graham the perfect venue so in 2014 we have the first earthquake retrofit a huge success were repeating this model what weve done it put together venues that are time professionals and contractor are financing institutions a other services that help people comply with the retrofit and as you can see the thousands of members of the public their assessing over one hundred vendors to comply with the ordinance or make improvements on their property i came to get specification information and puck h picking up information if you dont know what twaur doing i take it overwhelming. Were pleased a Critical Mass of people are keying into knowing their relents and understanding what had are the next steps to take and theyre figuring out who to talk to not only the contractor by the mustards and the architect and the Structural Engineers and getting the full picture of what options are necessary and being proacti proactive. So im very pleased to see the soft story buildings 99. 9 percent complies the highest of the program of this scale of the history a citywide effort high Blood Pressure in every stretch of San Francisco to understand real risks associated with earthquake and those are universally agreed on. At some point you need to gather information ill be talking to another engineer to come out and take a look at it and basically get a Second Opinion im for second and third opinions it is inspiring to see all the Property Owners that want to do the right thing and for proactively figuring out what the solutions to get them that. What is amazing to me here we are over two years of first retrofit fair and at the time we are rh2 out to contractors to help us and reaching it out to Design Professionals that soft story buildings is in any and people understanding how to comply now it is different an industry that springs up as a result of the their professed and gotten the costs down with lower Financing Options and these are defined and now the gene progression and have the buildings are buildings and the compliance we understand the 2020 one and 20 thousand San Franciscos 15 messenger of our population will live in a retrofit building those people buildings or lives in buildings with 5 or more residential building is soft story and wood frame and built before 1978 that house that one and 20 thousand san franciscans. San francisco is being the leader in getting in done and as you may know los angeles passed their retrofit law two months ago at the sort of taken San Franciscos lead on the one and tenth anniversary as the residents San Francisco this is a road map to the city and going to give us us plan are these to keep folks here on a disaster and steps to build a resident waterfront by 2020. This involves more than one and 80 individuals and over 60 nonprofits and other companies this is a huge plan and what are the challenges we realize that people are concerned about climatic change, Sea Level Rise and not only the affiliated hazards but things hike youre our amp infrastructure and consumed by social and other things we see this in society everyday and how we try to mitigate those are ultimately a direct result how resident we are after earthquake other issue out of the strategy of the concept after a major earthquake of keeping 95 percent of population here in San Francisco thats the single best thing to help a equitable recovery to keep people here keep people back to work and kids in school and a residents of normal after a disaster. Alliance energy in our partner undertook comprehensive bid process we interviewed a halfdozen of folks who wanted to have a part of our soft story buildings are ordinance so Alliance Energy project programming is a clean assess energy a special financing that is done using the taxed authority of local multiples and one of the interesting features the loan is tied to the property not the vital if an individual didnt have good credit but it is another option for people not able to comply to find another avenue the assessment is actually places on the property and the builds for in that come literally a line item on the tax bill thats how you pay off the segment and tax. 20 or thirty years is all paid up front there are advantages your property tax well it is important to give people on option and many private banks that provide loans over a are shorter term we wanted to create a longer pay back term. I think the next step for Property Owners after at the create themselves to take the plunge and quit the working downey done and have works of work done right of the right rest of the Property Owners can understand this process across the city. We need to do it. It is safety you know thats the bottom line safety. Earthquake safety a everybodys responsibility that is providing the resources that people need to get done if you want to know more of the resources as a san franciscan please visit the good morning. Today is wednesday march 15, 2017. This is a regular meeting of the Building Inspection Commission. I would like to remind everyone to please turn off all electronic devices. The first item on the agenda is roll call. President mccarthy. Here. Commissioner konstin. Here. Commissioner lee. Here. Commissioner warshell. He. We have a quorum and commissioner clinch and commissioner gilman are excused long with Vice President walker is excused. Our next item is item 2, president s announcements. Good morning everybody and welcome to the big meeting march 15, a couple of days before st. Patricks day which is going to be a long weekend so happy st. Patricks day to everybody as we start the meeting here and congratulate the director on the fabulous green tie here. Hes the only one that actually wore one want all right. I take that back. Commissioner lee as well. Good morning ladies and gentlemen. Welcome to the march meeting Building Inspection Commission meeting. Congratulations to commissioner chang yu that retired after years with Public Service with dbi and did pw and awarded proclamations and a dinner in honor my his colleagues and well done. He will be missed and what a great city servant for 30 years. On the andrea ruizesquide on the. Dbi seismic and the commissioner commiss went to the graduation and yet another class grateod february 24 when 65 seniors received graduation certificates of emergency and survival bags and from the director at the Senior Center and the program focuses on seniors and youth in chinatown the western edition bay view and richmond who complete a five week Training Course to ensure to know what exactly to do when the next earthquake hits San Francisco and this is preparation work that everyone in the city needs to do for themselves and families. Special thank it is to the fit fut vendors, cya, self help for the elderly and dbis lite matis that, woes with the vendors to implement these important programs. Thanks to the how longing inspector tim ree woo who got a letter of appreciation for helping tenants in the candlestick haights to get hot water running in the homes. Appropriate were having the conversation. The tenants were grateful the inspector came out two hours and well done and commissioner dennis ye got a thank you letter for a family getting heat in the family that were having problems for a year. They also said he was curacy professional and went above beyond the call of duty and thank you and well done there inspector. Just a reminder to all managers and supervisors and staff send the nominations for this years quarter 1dbi employee of the quarter to William Strom to continue to continue the Recognition Program of staff meeting and exceeding performance expectations. Were accepting nominations now and will announce our quarter one winner at the april meeting. Madam secretary that concludes my president s announcements. Thank you. Thank you. Is there any Public Comment on the president s announcements . Seeing none item 3 general Public Comment. The bic will take comments on items that are not part of this agenda. Good morning commissioners and thank you for providing this Public Comment. My name is wilma parker and a long time artist and a graduate of the Art Institute of chicago and Rhode Island School of design and i came back later on for five years as a trustee and my main concern then was how do you accommodate artists . The term artist housing is misleading. Theyre not pdr or not factory workers and providence has the same problem as we have here and most of the buildings died when the Industrial Revolution fell apart so we have the situation in San Francisco. Its really hard to find artist housing. What comes to mind fntion is the great trfnlg the ghost ship scbeerp all watching the news. This was a tragedy that never needed to happen. We have known for years how the artists live and to me is the great tragedy ever is the constant phrase rich artistic community. Starving Artist Community is more like tin fact the day of the fire people were talking about getting together to party with this rich artistic community. I mean the fact that maybe a couple ten, 12 artists were able to burn themselves to death by running too many extension cords and no stair case and invite the friends, the general public to join the party thats the art cry. If it hasnt been for the sons and daughters of the general public burned alive i dont think we got the attention we had. The ship building we had plenty in San Francisco. Our main industry die whd we defeated japan by knock out all the japanese shipping and retaliated and enjoyed our shipping industry. That building in oakland wasnt occupied since japan signed the surrender. These buildings are all over. We know about them. When theyre inhibited by artists and the joke is artistic aws autistic you mean but when others get involved its a problem. What do you do with the artists . The ghost ship and others like this and owned by the widows and elder women and dont know what is going with the buildings and turn them to criminal or not to predatory building managers and expect artists with no money and have not made sales forever or ever to bring them to code. Its impossible. Were building so much in the city. Homeless housing is easy to imagine. You need a little bed, bathroom and closet. Artistic housing or housing artists and the Cultural Workers is harder and we need to do better because a city without a cultural life and ability to house these people is like a body without a head. Its not going to the last long. Thank you for your time. Thank you ms. Parker. Good to see you. Thank you for making your comments today. Good morning commissioners. My name is john lofton and represent tim shik and one of the condo owners on noriega and here because of the illegal garbage sheds in the area. This matter has been going for four years now. There were sheds that were erected behind the building. Theyre a nuisance, dirty, smelly and attract vermin and in violation of the easements and covenants and restrictions on the building and this department has inspected and issued a notice of violation in 2015. We went through the appeal process, the abatement appeals board upheld the notice of violation, ordered the sheds removed in november 2015. The condo owners tried to meet with the bakery to work things out. Nothing happened and there was a request for rehearing and denyed in march 2016 so its been nearly a year now. The garbage sheds are still there. Were asking the commission and the department to take action have those sheds removed. Theres obviously been a lot invested in this dispute over the years. The departments inspectors, you the commissioners, the condo owners and the bakery owner and we would like to see this brought to a conclusion and send a signal to the public that the commission will enforce its notices of violation. Thank you. Thank you for your comments. Is there any additional Public Comment . Okay. Seeing none are we going to do number 4 . Yeah, we will do number four and five . No, lets move four. Lets move five. And lets go to number 7 number 7 if there is no objection from the fellow commissioners . No objection. Item 7, a couple items will be taken out of order today. Discussion on accela permit and project tracking system. Good morning commissioners. My name is sean beautiful scpint project manager working on the project. As you see in the status report we provided we actually have very good news to announce. We worked closely with the vendor and arrived on a statement of work that will basically outline the actions and the plan necessary to implement the accela system and weve reviewed it internally and weve come to alignment and in fact weve reviewed with the dbi Steering Committee which consists of the dbi leadership and they agree with the pran plans and the contents so it looks like were moving forward. At this point now we have a statement and work and add to the amendment and we have to go through the normal kind of contract approval processes involving contracts administration so thats basically where were at right now. The good news we have agreement on content and scope and requirements and importantly the methodology to get it done, and we have a plan for moving forward at this time. If you have any questions let me know. No questions. So we will probably maybe next month get a further update. We will probably have more questions then. Thank you sean for coming out. Next item. Any Public Comment on item 7 . Seeing none item 8 discussion of regarding the department departments procedures and plan review and policies for Tall Buildings and Performance Based applications under administrative bulletin 082 and 083. Good morning. I want to make sure everyone has the updated slide show that staff is going to present this morning and with that with introduction comments to the director and the staff and i want thank the director and staff for what were going to hear this morning in this report. Were pleased to have received your report. The department of Building Inspections Tall Building review process in response to questions that the commission outlined in a letter that we sent to you director december 6 in 2016. This report provides a comprehensive look at the complex process that goes into Plan Development and review, construction and inspections of Tall Buildings and it demonstrates that many experts both with dbi but particularly with reference to design and professionals and inspections all hired by the project sponsor required to ensure that Tall Buildings are constructed to meet the minimum Building Code standards and are safe for occupancy. The commission is appreciative of this work that went into this preparing this report and looks forward to continuing the work with dbi to help them inform the public around these important safety regulations. I would like to note that todays discussion is intended to review the Tall Buildings generally and that we will not be discussing any one building in particular. With that director if you have some comments before we go to the presentation. Good morning. My name is tom and director of building inspection. Thank you president mccarthy and all the commission to give us the opportunity to present and discuss about this Tall Buildings procedure and policy. First of all to define a Tall Building we have a definition in 2008 and then any building over 240 feet. Then we consider as a Tall Building in the definition, and then to remind you we have 200,000 building in town, very little over the 240 feet, only less than 1 , and later on we will give you more detail in the presentation. However, the ability of Construction Material and capability of the design continue [inaudible] in early 2000 we have more proposal to do more Tall Building of this kind and also the Department Took the positive way to improve our procedure and requirement to monitor this building design. In march 2008 we developed two administration bulletins ab082 and 83 address those issues. We believe this is good starting point you know to develop for our department to review the Tall Building in the process and then follow our publication on this administration bulletin and also we get recognition by the university of california Berkeley Pacific Engineering Research center in august 2008. They saying we are foresight and leadership in developing this process procedure. The administrative bulletin has been recently amended by dbi and also modified able to other improvement in our review process, and then also we also written we have confirm aigdz from the president of the association of [inaudible] california and they accept the request to reveal this administrative bulletin to see any improvement in our administrative bulletin in the future and also i would like to take this opportunity to appreciate some of our commission here and also our staff especially [inaudible]. We extensively work on the report and give you more detail how this process, how we feel about the Tall Building and super Tall Building 240 feet or more and i dont understand to spend too many time to talk and have my assistant director give you brief overall the presentation. If you have any questions you can ask us. We can give you further discussion. Good morning. Good morning. Ron tom assistant director of department of building inspection. President mccarthy, fellow commissioners thank you very much for this opportunity to present our very robust process that we have in place for Tall Buildings. Before you get started sorry for interrupting you. I was thinking before you started with the presentation and i dont know if its okay with the commissioners if we hold our questions to the end of the slide show . Obviously if you have a question that needs to be answered no problem and then maybe at the end if this is okay with you certainly president mccarthy. Okay. We will hold that to the end then. Thank you so much. All right. Again thank you. Dbi welcomes this opportunity to talk about its work to make San Francisco Tall Buildings safer. We appreciate the Building Inspection Commissions work and oversight on this important topic. We look forward to continuing the collaboration with you other city agencies and the stakeholders with a vested interest in this process. In presentation we will discuss the following items the difference between code proscriptive Structural Design and Performance Base Structural Design and talk about safety including the pier review process. What is the role of professionals and design design inspections . And talk about inspections at dbi. What is the San Francisco Building Code made up of . Its made of three parts. We have the international Building Code. Thats the model code. California adopt its and makes make amendments and becomes the california code and San Francisco also makes amendments and provides the minimum standards and what is the dbi role in this based on the San Francisco Building Code . We regulate design, construction, quality of materials, use and occupancy. What dbi doesnt do is we dont propose plans. We dont make repairs. We dont design or construct buildings. And the code is updated every three years. Its a living document. Types of Structural Design. Under the california Building Code under the San Francisco Building Code we have two types of Structural Design methods. It is either the code proscriptive Structural Design which is the prevailing method or the special case of the Performance Base Structural Design. So whats this about code proscriptive Structural Design in well, we have over 200,000 buildings in San Francisco. 99. 99 of the buildings use the proscriptive design method. What is it . Its like using a recipe. It specifies building requirements including height and size restrictions. When theres a building that is over 240 feet and becomes a Tall Building then we have peer review and we will get into that later. When choosing to submit a performance Structural Design the project sponsor commits to utilizing advance detail computer analysis and designs to develop a building that will have the same performance and code proscriptive Structural Design as a code proscriptive Structural Design and one that meets the minimum requirements or exceeds them as contained in the San Francisco Building Code. Were talking about a very rear number of buildings that have utilized this process. For the past years we have over 3,000 New Buildings. We only have 15 of those as Performance Base design buildings. So were talking about less than. 4 percent. Appearance and Structural Designs. What this slide illustrate is how those Performance Based designs represent a very small sliver of all the New Buildings that we construct in San Francisco for the last 16 years. This slide illustrates the differences and the historical changes that have occurred where we shifted from the old financial districts with the high rises occurred into the south of market area. This has been a dramatic shift. A collaborative approach. Everybody has a part to play in this process. Its very complicated. Its very complex and takes years to accomplish. So what did the owner and developers whats their responsibility . They hire design prch professionals, the inspectors and contractors and in turn the subcontractors. The Design Professionals design the projects. Between the Design Professionals and the owner they decide what method to use in terms of Structural Design, the proscriptive method or the Performance Base method but of course if its 240 feet or more its a proscriptive method Performance Base method utilizing peer review. They choose Building Materials and they work with city agency to get the building constructed. They maintain safety of the building during construction and after the Department Issues a certificate of final certificate of final completion and occupancy and if anything comes up that is a safety issue its their obligation to disclose to the department of building inspection. Whats the role of the Design Professional . They propose the structural seismic design and they look at the geotechnical soil report to determine how the structural system will be built. They follow the San Francisco Building Code. They keep their own records and responsible for reviewing all the inspection compliance documents and submittals are made at the end of the project. These Design Professionals include on this team the architect, the engineers structural and mechanical and electrical engineer. What is dbis role . We ensure that the plans and construction follow the San Francisco Building Code. We inspect Life Safety Systems in a building it ensure theyre code compliant. We monitor all changes approved by the engineer of record and in the end we issue the certificate of final completion and occupancy certificate of final certificate of final. What this slight ilslates is the pro illustrates is the proportionate responsibility of all the participants in this complex and complicated project. Dbi inspectors we do spot check at important milestones. The design team especially the Structural Engineer and the soil engineer go inspect the site on a periodic basis. The owner hires special inspectors to have full time observation of the structural installation and the owner has on the job full time his contractor and the subcontractors. So this illustrates the proportionate time that we as a department spend on the duration of the project. From design to construction the owner perfect purchases the site, secures the financing and hires the Design Professional and submitted to the department and for the permit. Unique to San Francisco they use a site permit process. Its a set of conceptual design drawings for new and existing construction. Its the first step of seeking job approval from dbi and the Planning Department and it recognizes it as a legal project giving it entitlements. It does not allow for construction. Structural design criteria is also required for peer review projects at the initial site permit stage. The agenda following the approval and issuance of the site approval they come into the department and in sequence of construction generally and describe construction like the a tukture and mechanical and planning and each of the stages are authorized with approval for the construction in the field. And what this peer review have to do with these Tall Buildings especially compared to other cities . As the project goes through the process the peer review process is invoked and extensive and robust compared to other major cities. The panel consists typically of two, three independent experts. They are the geotechnical and Structural Engineer and often a seismic expert. The geotechnical and Structural Engineer are experts with california license as engineers and are current practitioners in their field of expertise. Since 2008 all new building projects in San Francisco are subject to these bust robust standards with review. Dbi improves its process to ensure the independence of outside experts. Lets look at the history of peer review in the process comparing pre2008 and to the current process we have in plan and looking forward. Prior to 2008 there were no written peer review processes in place. It was not required but upon seeing more Tall Buildings submitted to bb i they took the initiative and we were proactive in supplementing the San Francisco Building Code. In coronation with the Structural Engineers association of Northern California we developed a formal requirement. First ab082 and later ab083. Formally requiring third party pee rereviews and for anything over 240 feet its mandatory. What about october 2016 to the present . Were improving. We have made improvements and theyre under development. Third party peer review appointments are now made by dbi without project sponsor input at the expense of the project sponsor. We have started drafting a request for qualifications to set up a vetted pool of peer review experts to engage in Tall Building projects in the future. Permitting inspection and occupancy. So weve gone through the site permit and process. The agenda are issued. Construction begins. Dbi spot checks the projects progress during different points in the construction. We make visual inspections of the site to ensure work is code compliant and conforms through proof, plan and permit documents and also are the special inspector and the engineer of record during this time. As the project nears completion a multiple multitude of things must happen even before we consider to do the final inspection and ultimately issuing the cfc. All the agency have to approve. It could be public works, public utility commission, the Fire Department, our own divisions, plumbing, electrical, building. The Owner Design Team have documents they have to submit to the Department Like structural observation letter, special inspector have to submit. Third agencies have to submit an affidavit. After all this is done and were sure that the project and the progress have reached the point where its suitable to do the final inspection we will conduct that final inspection and if everything is in order, all paperwork is submitted we issue the certificate and all maintenance and safety is the owners responsibility is the owners responsibility. So whats the role of this special inspection that i refer to earlier . Its required by the Building Code. Its conducted by a certified third parties who are engaged by the owner developer. They are separate. They perform their own inspections and theyre qualified third parties in addition to our dbi inspectors and the project design team. What do they do . They monitor the project for material and workmanship critical to the buildings integrity. Theyre on site full time for the foundation and structural aspects of the construction. They keep daily logs. At the end of the project before we will even consider issuing a cfc they have to submit an affidavit to the department and that affidavit coming from the agency that employs the special inspector also has a letter stamped by their on staff engineer, a registered engineer. What about the design team . The engineer of record, the engineers of record both the geotechnical engineer and the Structural Engineer have to submit letters of observation. They attest that the required structural observation conforms to the approved plans. We require this before we issue even consider a final inspection to issue a cfc and it is regulated by administrative bulletin ab46. From time to time a Tall Building will want to exvacate for basements or sublevels for other uses below the water table. How do we know where the water table occurs . Every site is different. Well, its contained in the soil report. The soil engineer through the borings and investigation establish the level of the water table. The Structural Engineer provides the design on how far into that water table and below it the construction will occur together based on the recommendations of the soil engineer they determine and craft the strategy for shoring and dewatering. Dewatering is the removal of water from a construction site in order to make it suitable for construction and inspections. It is the responsible and possibility of the owner and his or her Construction Team. It also includes the geotechnical engineer as part of that team as they move forward in the dewatering process. Who has oversight as far as the city agency is concerned . Its not dbi. Its the puc and the Public Health departments. Dewatering is not in the Building Code so we have no jurisdiction. Finally the last slide is about our record retention policy. Throughout the permitting and inspection process numerous documents are approved and issued. San francisco Current Record retention departments go above and beyond california Building Code. Dbi is making them even stronger. Dbi continues to update the policy for documents to make them centrally located and accessible. And just in the last 16 years we have recorded over 2 million documents. Commissioners that brings an end my formal presentation. I am open to questions and i gladly welcome them. Well, thank you very much assistant director for that presentation. I have a lot of questions for you. Its like the best seller for me last night going through and i wrote down the questions when i get to my questions but i would like to go to my other commissioners before me and do you have any questions commissioners . Do you want me to start . Yes please. Thank you. I have a question regarding a special inspectors. I understand the role and relationship between the project engineer and the department, but is there any relationship between the special inspectors and the department . Meaning if the special inspector sees a problem out there of course hes noticing the project engineer. What did the project engineer doesnt tell dbi or our department and is there any recourse . How do we know if the special inspector says theres a problem . Commissioner lee as i mentioned earlier on the slide its a collaborative effort. A lot of parties are engaged. If theres a deviation from the approved initial plans or deviation from the accepted standards for that specific type of work and its cited by the special inspector that report goes to the owner, gets transferred transmitted to the contractor. Also it is transmitted to the engineer of record. At that point and time together they have to craft a strategy and how to address and mitigate those deviations. Some of them are not very high in terms of complexity so they work that out themselves and we dont it just moves forward from that point. You missed the bebar or the cable didnt go the correct height. Those can be dealed with in the field. If substantial our inspector that goes out periodically number informed by the general inspector that there is a deviation, and the special inspector will provide the information for our inspector. Our inspector has the opportunity to write a correction notice and gives it to the contractor and gets the process rolling and how to mitigate and have him place something written and disseminated to all parties including our department and if it requires a supplemental, amendment to the approved issued plans then that is submitted to our department for review and issuance. If its substantial and theres an impasse which is very rare we always have the opportunity to issue a notice of violation which could stop a portion of the work or if its really extensive we can stop the job. I understand that. I understand ultimately the responsibility belongs to the owner contractor engineer of record, but what happens if there is something that maybe the engineer of roar decides its not a big beale. Deal. Maybe they build it into the 6 inches of rightofway and it is building is structural sound but the department doesnt catch it butt special inspector says its 6 inches over the line. But nobody reports it to the department but the Department Later on say hey wait a minute. We found out its 6 inches over the line and the building is up in the air how do we correct that . Is there a way for the special inspector to reach us first and this is causing a little problem and we may see a bigger problem in the future . Well, the answer to that question really relates to the stage that it occurs that its brought to our attention. If its early on while we still havent yet to construct the super structure part that is of a level talking about encroaching a public way is of a level we can stop the job because it is severe. We dont want to construct the project and the whole building and one portion encroachos public way. I would expect something as severe as that would never get to the point where you Start Building the super structure without anybody aware of it until you actually get halfway through and completed. I think that fits into the category of being sever and potentially a game changer in terms of construction sequence. You have to address that right away. You cannot just ignore that because what happens you compound the problem if you let it go on and we would exercise our ability to stop the job. I think the director may want director. Commissioner lee first of all i have 11 years of design experience for design high rise buildings, small building. What happened is everybody have responsibility because we are licensed engineer, myself a Structural Engineer. When we do a project its required by the Insurance Company we go out and work with the special inspector you know to make sure they do their job. Sometimes recommend the owner to fire the special inspector if theyre not doing their job. To answer your question regarding encroaching to the public line its a severe thing. That would be [inaudible] give you the boundary if you go over that it is the responsibility of the contractor if they go beyond the public line. Then you know their responsibility. I dont think even the architect or engineer can take it easy on that kind of major item because later on they have a responsibility. They will sue by the owner and the department of public works if encroaching on the public way. Thats why we have check and balance on all this stuff. I dont concern that much and thats why our inspector also go out there to work with them cooperatively. Can i ask a second question and then let the rest of the commissioners absolutely commissioner lee. My second question is dewatering. I didnt see anywhere in the report do the other cities that we approach like los angeles, seattle do they require a permit for dewatering . And if so how do they handle it . No. California. Dewatering really has been the responsibility of the Construction Team and the geotechnical engineer and the owner. But we did ask . None of the other cities require it . The administrative process itself maybe a little different. Okay. As i stated earlier in our jurisdiction the puc and Health Department have oversight for the discharge of that water. In l. A. They use a different they actually have within l. A. They also have utilities so you may have to go through prove to them everything youre doing complies with the dewatering process already contained in the permit process in their review of this issued permits, but in my investigation it just is for us in california a construction means methods of construction because generally speaking once you accomplish your foundation and lets assume you have created this impermeable bathtub and holds back the base and water of the bathtub and dewatering at some point no longer occurs so lets say in the bigger scheme of things its a temporary measure. Generally not a permanent measure so thats why its a methods and means of construction. Thank you commissioner lee for your comments. Commissioner warshell please. This was also best seller reading for me, and i will preference my comments unlike my colleagues who are in the construction industry, architects, engineers, im the most layman so i apologize if any of these are too layman oriented, but another preliminary comment i would like to say that i respect the comment that we shouldnt be speaking about any specific building and this is not meant to be that, but you know it will be thinly veiled as to where the reference maybe on a couple of my points, so for instance we talk about dbi doesnt randomly inspect without cause. You need a complaint to generate an inquiry. The owner must disclose any safety concerns, and you know the requirements of the engineer of record to maintain records and the like. I guess my question really comes up you know, we may get to the completion of a building and decide that its structurally sound and issue a certificate of occupancy or certificate of completion but there maybe discrepancies that come up that some elements of a building are not performing as expected, and when that occurs you know we still seem to be in this mode of saying that were going to be complaint driven. You know some citizen or somebody has to make a complaint before we can do a follow up investigation. It leads me to wonder if there should be some trigger for follow up you know almost perpetual monitoring generated when any element of performance is not in line with the original expectations, so could you speak to that if i made that clear . Or if you need clarification tell me if that was too circular . So if i understand your question, your inquiry here we have certain processes in place subsequent to the issuance of the cfc, and if something occurs is there another method to be made aware of it and to be able to follow up on it which may include continuing observation after the building is completed . Is that the right yeah, is there something where a performance is not in line with what was originally expected that would trigger more continuous follow up . Even if it didnt rise to the merit issuing the certificate of completion certificate of occupancy . I think the answer to that is our current policy as stated before is complaint driven and theres a reason for that. Well, there are several reasons. First we do dont regular inspections of buildings other than the Housing Group looks at the older residential buildings about every five years. For high rises the Fire Department will do their inspections annually but theyre looking for the Life Safety Systems to be in order. Structural systems by its nature are fairly static. Theyre not dynamic. I mean even there are changes those changes are so incremental, so inperceptionable to the human eye and maybe theyre anecdotally ways that you see something as no longer level, but theres very incremental and historically with 200,000 buildings it just doesnt occur very often, so i think our current policies and procedures which are complaint driven and are very transparent. Theyre responded to very, very quickly, and theyre tracked making them available to the public. I mean thats a the process in place that has worked for 200,000 buildings. I believe in my professional opinion thats the only practical way for this to continue. We would have to adopt and vet out a whole new process where we as a department had to have continued observations or awareness of a building once we issue the cfc, and as an administrator looking at all the other responsibilities we have as a department for the ability to manage all of that for such a small in fact infin tassal problem that is currently being perceived would take away from all the other responsibilities that we have and so the priorities have to be established by this commission at some point. Where do you want our limited resources to be deployed . Keeping in mind that the owner and a host of i whole team of Design Professionals and construction s have a legal obligation to own sure that the ensure that the building is safe and in california we have a ten year latent defects law like a stature of limitations for things not readily seen by the naked eye for any party who has ownership to file litigation and that process is well established and it holds the Design Professional, the owner, and the Construction Team fully responsible for what gets built. I think those checks and balances have worked very well and i would propose that we maintain our complaint driven process so that we can deploy our limited resources to using the priorities set by this commission so i will wait until the director will wait until you change those priorities and then we will then address them as the time comes. I hope that provides you with some insight into where our department considers how to address this very small problem that has occurred. Yes, it does, and thank you for your response. I think that you rightly point out that when we have 200,000 buildings and the massive numbers it would be completely impractical to try to have a follow up system on any deviations and the question really is you know where are the numbers and what rises to that . You know its almost like in the discussions of you know, the proscriptive designs there is such a small piece of what we do, and the Tall Buildings are such an infinitesimal small number of the total number of projects that we work on that it would bring to my mind a question not that we have you know a blanket policy that every project a small wood frame construction house, but rather you know in these very high profile, very high consequence cases that we consider having more stringent monitoring follow up and review of deviations just because the implications here are so much more profound, and again if its your opinion thats such a small frame of reference that the overall policy is still over effective then i certainly respect your opinion and i know its more based in fact than anything i would have, but to ensure feelings that where these essentially stable situations exist and differences are almost imperceptable to most people as you rightly point out to have some of these rely on citizen complaints when they would be virtually imperceptable and not sort of draw on our insights and knowledge that certain elements are not performing as we had expected, and those very rare situations to not interrupt the total departments procedures and priorities, but for those rare exceptions where there is something where a citizen complaint based on the inperacceptability would be hard to come by but we do have knowledge there is something out there that might be a cause for concern that we might want to have some follow up is really what i am suggesting. Thank you. Commissioner warshell. Thank you for your comments and observation. Okay. I think ron is going to need your help up here and i want to apologize up front here because like i was saying commissioner warshell was working on it last night and its an incredible document and a road map but the commission obviously its great roll back for the representation but the general public can see what our criterias and how stringent and how theres strong policies in place for all the good reasons were talking about this evening but i want to apologize up front if i am asking the same questions asked but i wrote a bunch of questions here, and theyre kind of forgive me theyre kind of like theyre clarification in my eyes so i can read in the record theyre certain procedures that definitely happen and i dont know if we go to the collaborative approach Design Professional slide and in mine its ten and it might be different. Its the same . Okay. So based on my understanding of Design Professionals section of the report can you confirm and it can be yes or no and if you want to elaborate thats fine the following statements. The geotechnical engineer recommends it is subsurface and system . Youre correct. The geo engineer does the [inaudible] yes. The geo engineer recommends if piles or piers are necessary. Yes. The geo engineer recommends specifically the types and piers and piles called out in the design. Yes. The geo engineer does the test piles for a project . Yes. Okay. The geotechnical engineer specifies the depth of the piers and the piles. Yes. The geo engineer specifies the blow count. Its the blow count or to achieve if its a pile the skin friction requirements that are delineated in the soil report. Okay. But thats his job . Thats his job. Okay. The geotechnical engineer recommends the spacing of the piles so whenever they are around the site. Yes. Okay. The geotechnical engineer recommends and accepts or rejects and this question you might have answered any changes in the field . I think you answered it with commissioner lee. Thats correct. All right. The geotechnical engineer determines the soils type, what kind of soil it is whether dense yes thats true. The soil boring stage where theyre doing test boring and they interpolate between the bore scption what the soil looks like below grade and the height of the water table. Okay. So the geotechnical engineer perform site visits . Absolutely. Does the other Design Professionals rely this is important to me relies upon the recommendations of the geotechnical engineer . In other words the Structural Engineer work closely with the geotechnical engineer . Thats correct. Its a process engaging both Design Professionals. Perfect. Does the department rely upon this report . Yes. The reports that youre given from the geotechnical engineer . The short answer is yes and our staff utilizes both the values contained in the soil report and look at the recommendations and compare it to the plans submitted for permitting. Very good. And the geotechnical engineer write a letter at the end that all of the work was done according to the recommendations they put in their reports . Yes. Very good. Geotechnical has a very big part it also starts with the geotechnical engineer. Yeah, it starts with him. So do you mind breeze do. Its not fair but the special informations part inspections part and i broke it down this way. Special inspections special inspectors and that part of the equation of the job. Theyre primarily responsible to determine if the installation of the piles are consistent with the recommendations put forward in the geotechnical report test pile thaws see on the job site . Yes. Okay. The special inspections report reports any changes in the field . They will document it. They would document it. Okay. But theyre the primary eyes and that is not consistent with what is approved and make that yes. Okay. Special inspector monitors lets say for example the rebar, the spacing, the sizing all of the things called out in the report. Yes. The special inspector monitors concrete columns and walls and strength of concrete stuff like that you know the concrete pour and the test are done on that . As we all know concrete is all you see is the finished product and a lot goes under it in a floor or in a wall and those eyes and ears look at those installations and they document it and put it in a daily log if they conform or dont conform. Okay. Special inspector monitors welding a lot of buildings are steel and they monitor that . Yes, in fact if its steel frame building there are multiple special inspectors conducting welding testing in various locations all at the same time. So these professionals are pretty much on the job a lot and not if not all of the time versus the dbi inspector . Yes, in the previous slide i think we try to illustrate the proportion of how the two relate in terms of working on a job coming to a project. Thats slide 11. Okay. Okay. So i guess yeah, so the answer is yes. That clearly okay. So i think the final certificate of occupancy, a very important document affecting the whole project and the single most important document. Right. So this is the be all and end all of journey to get so a few questions regarding to clarification for me and the public and who might be looking in on this so does the department require a letter from the geotechnical engineer before issuing the certificate of occupancy . Yes, the cfc is not issued as i stated earlier a lot of things happen. One of the extremely high level high importance is that letter of observation from the Structural Engineer of record and as we said earlier the soil engineer of record. What would the department be looking for in this letter . Its very brief letter but essentially states that that i, the engineer, have observed that attest to the fact that the construction and installation complies with the plans. Okay. So it speaks to the installation of the piles, the leapt, the spacing, the blows of all the stuff i called out earlier . That letter would not get drill that that far in specificity but passes what you cited . Does it require a letter from the Structural Engineer . Yes. What are they looking for in this letter . The structural initial provides a letter of observation and at the end of the job. And the cfc is never issued unless we receive that. Just playing devils advocate youre missing a letter and say its coming would you issue the certificate of occupancy . I would expect all of our inspection staff prescribes to the requirement to receive and verify that all the required documents, everything has been completed approved and signed off, so in other words there are many within dbi there are various staff who are responsible for the different aspects and so if im the inspector in the field im going to check all of that and talk to the party in our department who handles special inspection to see that has been completed and the letter is in our file. So no cfo unless you have everything . Thats it. Correct. Thats the law of the land. So the next one is the peer review section and i have a few questions if that is okay and thank you for your patience after you have been up here a long time, but can you the peer review, can you open that section . Okay. You got it. Can you walk us through this section on the bottom here . What page is it on . Its actually in the report. Sorry. My apologies. Which i believe its 13 or 14 . [inaudible] [off mic] the peer review process table two. [inaudible] [off mic] perfect. Lily. Thank you for that. Sorry. I should have give you a heads up on that. Could you put it up . That would be great. There it is. Reading through the report this document really jumped out on me on the review and i thought we could read it as commissioners and go through the points here i think it would really help us. So i wonder if you could go through the items here and just on the blue section here and reinforce the peer review process for us. What is up on the screen is the portion of the process roles and call it table two. Dbi whats our role . We activate the Peer Review Panel and choose the members since october 2016. We approve the scope of the work and service to be provided and any subsequent changes are reviewed. What is the role of the pe er review panel . It consists of two, three individual experts. They report all findings to dbi. They check Structural Engineering concepts, provide constructability review, review project assumptions and a project approach and they review Structural Design criteria and analysis and design methodology. What is the responsibility of the project sponsor or owner . Has a contractual agreement with peer reviewers and compensate the panel and the members for professional services and fees. Okay. So this is where youre making big changes. You mentioned this is Going Forward and the director you kind of instructed from new policies and place in regard to this . Yeah, were working on it and try to get yeah, thats the big one, and i kind of want to read this into the record and i found this page clarifies this peer review and to the general public its complex and this document lays it out and i appreciate that in the main report and just this is just me getting too much in the weeds here but there was discussions about some of the complicated what did i write down . Complicated Software Systems that the department doesnt have but others have. Can you explain why we dont have them and why they have them and like that. As stated earlier the Tall Buildings are complex, complicated. They have to handle gravity lateral loads for wind and earthquake in San Francisco. The model of how it responds to earthquake action whether moderate or severe theyre beyond the capability of our staff. We dont have soft Story Software and often its it is proprietary and dont expect the government to have that proprietary software in all the itderations waiting for a job to come in and we dont have the ability to employ it or have the ability to analyze the output of very complicated information, so our staff depends and relies on independent third party Peer Review Panel members to provide us with their findings. Okay. So its pretty unique software. Yes. Just as any other jurisdictions might have that software . No. No . I think los angeles bigger jurisdiction than ours. They have this process as well and its follows similar to what we have. Okay. Okay. Good. So the definitions in the main report there were definitions there and i do know them but once again for the general public i want to you explain them quickly to me. Life Safety Systems. That comes up a lot in our reports and your definition of life Safety System would be great. Its very inclusive. What most people understand about life safety or what they see theyre look at ive aisles. Theyre looking at quarters and stairs and fire doors that protect the stairs. Fire doors in the path of egress that protect them and provide safe passage and evacuation of a building during an emergency. It includes also when you look at it strobes in high rise building, audio e nawns eightor and a Sprinkler System and many components composed of the Safety System. Collectively what theyre there for is to protect the occupants and provide them the ability to safely evacuate a building during an emergency. We talk a lot about the engineer of record, right and your definition is . So engineer of record is used often and what it means is that engineer of record and really in a Tall Building there is more than one engineer of record. Engineer of record in a Tall Building would be the geotechnical engineer and the Structural Engineer. Okay. All right. I got them down here. And quickly ab bulletins are something the public i only learned what they meant and getting your reports and what does it mean exactly . For a department to operate on a regular basis trying to answer issues about how to interpret the code we use the information sheet. Those are modified as processes change. In comparison we have administrative bulletins. Those are actual code amendments, information sheets are not. They help to facilitate ongoing processes in the department to get things done but administrative bulletin they have policies and procedures and go through the process includes the Code Advisory Committee and composed of experts in the field and were talking about in this case ab082 and 083 engineers, practicing engineer, registered initials in california. They contribute to the development of the two administrative bulletin. All of the other administrative bulletins that cover other issues like Life Safety Systems are accessibility are also contained as code amendments and theyre vetted through code advisory as well. They are brought before this commission and this commission passes them and goes to the board of supervisors and when we do that theyre incorporated into each three year iteration and changes the San Francisco amendments. So three years every three years or as necessary but generally three years we try to make sure we encapsulate any new administrative bulletins and modify any that need to be modified because of Technology Changes or just updated because of changes in the construction industry. Okay. Thank you for that. So im almost finished commission if you can bear with me. I highlighted this because some of the questions in the report which i think is kind of important that we read this. I think page 13. I can give you a break and i can read it so forgive me with my bad reading. I am just getting started. Thank you assistant director. Dbi doesnt propose building plans or refairs or construct or design building and inspections include Life Safety Systems in buildings and code compliant. Once dbi issues a certificate of final completion and occupancy upkeep, which we talked about, upkeep of the building including continued maintenance and safety is the responsibility of the ownership. Dbi doesnt randomly inspect buildings without cause but the department will respond to any citizen complaint filed about a building by performing a visual site inspection. Complaints maybe miled on line email or through the system and talks to your points and clearly here and i think i think you did a really good job explaining that how you feel and all those all that you stated is correct. Okay. So finally in closure here okay and the director maybe you want to weigh in if ron cant answer these questions. The department has put in place and is considering new policies regarding Tall Buildings. It will see a comprehensive report outlining these along with a look at following pertaining to Tall Buildings so what i notice in the report which seems to be something that you focused in is record of retention policies. What changes are you doing there . And i guess in all these questions director maybe we can close it out is when we would be getting back with the changes . When do we expect to hear back when these new policies are fully implemented and in place . One of the significant changes that were talking about has to do with peer review. What were doing now is preparing a request for qualifications so we can vet the qualifications and then we can retain a group of individuals and experts in the field and licensed engineers have them on for future projects rather than seek them out when a project occurs. The record retention policy, the one on that. My apologies. No worries. So the record retention policy or peer review we implemented that on that one stage and keep the iteration of the letter and when they produce it its centrally located and accessible to staff and if you need to look at it you just have to provide the permit application number. Other future retention policy changes well, let me go through them here for you. Okay. Digital digitizing our records and another thing i heard in the report that were working on. Yes, digitizing the record well, thats generalized meaning that all the records that we are supposed to keep like permits, like the application, like the plans. Yeah. We are going through right now a five year were more than halfway into scanning all of that and indexing them and making them readily available to specific individuals within our department so theyre readily accessible. Right and the peer review process is changing, you changed policies there . Yes. To what exactly what have you done now thats definitely in place . And obviously there are more changes coming along . What is definitely in place now as of december is were collecting all of them and theyre all in a centralized digitized format location a file that is accessible to the staff, and [inaudible] perhaps the director can assist me on that. Do we have anything future that we have discussed regarding that . Its not coming to mind. Peer review. Well, i think maybe im not clear here. I know we had a policy of the who maybe for example who funded the peer reviews . Who paid for the process . Was it the department, the ownership . Was that kind of commissioner sorry yeah, the owner still needs to pay for it but in the process we want to set up they pay the department and then we will pay them independently so thats still in the process because thats contractors stage and [inaudible] and how to get the expertise convene. Okay. So thats something in so what i am kind of asking here i would like to see a comprehensive report coming back on all the changes that is happening that you see improvements that need to be done based on this report that you have and saying heres what we have done differently now, what we learned from and improving Going Forward and inspector training. Im not sure what the process is for training of inspectors. For example lets just ask ourselves this question. Its a very difficult job and theres so much evolving and changing and code changing and different designs coming out. How do we as a department and inspectors keep on top of this so were cutting edge when the inspectors go out and know what theyre seeing . I imagine as a builder contractor every time i look at plans there is something new that i have not seen before, and i dont expect the answer now ron but are we looking at that as something going into the future how we will keep on top that and this is our policy and have in place . Yes commissioner. Yeah. We are . Okay. Okay. Training is a top priority for me as a director. Even myself i always go to the training. Even tonight i am going to the night class. Also within the department each staff meeting we always have a training for the staff for the new policy and procedure including the ada or other topic and also we annually we always send our inspector and [inaudible]. Thats why we have [inaudible]. Remember we organize our staff to go for training. You know its a big topic for us besides all other management class. We want to make sure technically were uptodate because in this world everything is evolving, changing, new technology. You mentioned about the computer program. However, its time consuming for those but we need to understand those program. Right. What is coming from this report is really were seeing weve got to make some changes to make our system better and so what i am asking and im going to ask you director when we make these changes and were improving these new policies that its put into a report and comes in some help hen report heres what we did in 2017 to address policies that need improvement and modernization. And special inspections if we approve that and what we did and evolving and showing were cutting edge and engaged in all the new policies and changes that the industry keeps facing so i guess ron tom is there Something Like a report that could come as a commission that updates us every do i break it down and say record retention policy. Can i come next month and what improvements and changes happened there since we talked last . I am trying to find out the most efficient way to do that. Commissioner mccarthy i think that would be a prudent way as a department to stay on top of this and how the progress is encapsulated, how its disseminated and also provide the commissioners with a report on a regular basis at your call. Okay. So somebody that has worked very hard along with lily and i want to call out lily and bill strom and the Deputy Director who is participated through the direction of the director and yourself that worked hard on the report what is a fair time to come back with these type of reports . I would recommend a quarterly basis. Okay. If we want to take one item and calendar that item and have a discussion on it if the information is available and ready . Yes commissioner. Well in closing the most enjoyable of packages that i got as i sit here. As a builder its going to be my bible Going Forward and particularly teaching and were talking about Tall Buildings but this resonates to all buildings because a lot of the process theyre in Tall Buildings are in and the smaller buildings around town so i think its a great start and i look forward to having this report constantly updated and improved on and i want to commend the staff for putting it together and their hard work and thank the commissioners for their patience and commissioner lee wants to say something. Thank you for the time up here and giving a great report here today. Okay. Commissioners thank you for the opportunity and i want to say representing our staff that worked on this its been challenging but look at ourselves and our processes internally it makes us think about how can we improve them and be accountable for them as well. Commissioner lee. Yes. I will be brief i will try to be brief. Thank you ron tom for this discussion. Its useful very informative. Being on the architect seat im a member of the industry so my view of it always is that the owner of the project, the architects, the developers are responsible for the project, but this discussion forces me to remove myself from that industry and put myself on the other side as a public member. As a public how do i know that the project is safe for the public . Thats what i am looking at at this point and this whole discussion is very useful, allows me to think how the public views projects and how we may be able to make sure that the public trust us to make sure that the projects are built safely. Good comment. Commissioner warshell youre not off the hook yet. Okay. Again thank you for all this. It really is eye opening and informative. One thing that i didnt see is any discussion about how when were developing regions or clusters of buildings you know when we rezone an area whether rincon hill or trans bay or the hub we get many of the 240foot buildings or higher in very close quarters, and by almost the inherent nature of them many of them are sitting on top of our transit infrastructure or other very, very complicated infrastructure systems, and can you just speak a bit to the comprehensive plans and the interactions of the variety of projects that are like to happen in a High Development area as opposed to the very project specific which is what i really see here, you know, within the confines of your order we have these guidelines, so you can speak to how were getting that broader overview and interrelationship . I think its quite difficult for our department to look at this on a regional high level basis because were not charged with providing that entitlement. We dont see the Bigger Picture because the projects are coming to us incrementally and transmitted to the Planning Department. The Planning Department they do the regional planning. They do the local planning and neighborhood planning. They set the height and the mass. They set all of the guidelines so when we get Tall Buildings next to each other and low rise in neighborhoods. They have the high level view how that development occurs because they provide those parameters. What we see is one building at a time come through and as soon as its submitted it winds up going transmitted to the Planning Department and sits there especially the Tall Buildings were referring to probably years before they get their entitlement so theres a long period of time that goes by before we even see it again so for us we have no control over that how the sequence, how often it comes so we have would have a difficult time to have oversight of that. We can plot them on a map but all that does is show when it first came in and later when we finally get it. The Building Code has been reinforced even most recent iteration and the reinforcement has to do with how a building on one site has to review how it may impact the building on the adjacent site. Its in the Building Code but still puts the onus on the design team but a requirement they consider the impact of the adjacent building that has already been built so if you dont have a deep foundation it my not be a great impact. If you do have a significant foundation relative to that property it may have Significant Impact and you have to take that into consideration and codified and strengthened this year. We implemented the 2016 Building Codes and all the models different San Francisco Building Codes collectively. So you feel its adequate, the degree to which we understand how all of these projects that are happening in a very concentrated area or likely to happen in a very concentrated area mechanically interact . I understand what you are saying and planning determines the heights and where to occur but youre charged with make sure each building is safe and properly built with possibly some complicated interactions based on so much going on in a very, very dense infrastructure rich area . Commissioner warshell, i have personally witnessed acute awareness raised among the plan review staff, and what theyre now doing what this whole process is now done to everyone is raise their awareness, their acute awareness how important it is at the very on set looking at a project to see what the parameters are set, and the soil report and what they recommend and also look at what is adjacent. To ask questions and theyre not answered to keep asking the same questions until they get a reasonable and satisfactory answer and they will ask the soil engineer and also ask the Structural Engineer what are you doing about what is happening next door . Are you going to put in safe practices, good practices, like monitoring, like setting benchmarks on the adjacent buildings with surveys and monitoring that on a regular basis during the course of that construction to verify if there is an impact on the adjacent properties . Thats one of the any good contractor would do that but thats what were looking for now. If you dont have it in the soil report or the construction process. Keep in mind that at a high level taking into account the larger context of where all these buildings occur adjacent to one another. At the Planning Department we have the Environmental Impact report and looks at the various aspects including what does it do to wind by another building and wind is diverted and changes the dynamics of the building because of the wind and there already but impacted by the next building so dir goes through the technical modeling oftentimes for wind and wind tunnel testing with real scaled models and looked at dir and provides the high level more regional more comprehensive look at the impact of one project to the adjacent projects and we know that includes transportation and issues of that ilk. Thank you. Thats very helpful. Just two shorter comments. Reading the whole thing about peer sister city things and los angeles and seattle were forthcoming in information and san diego and san jose a bit less so. You know again in reading this my supposition is we may have the most stringent standards already and something you hint at. I concur with that commissioner. But do you see any need to more aggressively go back to any of the sister cities or expand this to best practices in other pacific rim high density cities such as tokyo or osaka that have similar experiences and similar situations even though theyre not dealing with california Building Code . Up to now we havent reached across the pacific to our other jurisdictions. I mean its something we may consider but certainly we reached out to those on the west coast and los angeles which has this process. And finally a great deal of the report was really talking about proscriptive versus code compliant, and while youre right the numbers are never going to be big for high rises to the total construction of that it will dominate over the proscriptive there is uptick in proscriptive and just as a layman that is always skeptical of everything on computers when i am reading this my first thing is almost gut reaction if its code compliant its based on our real experience and its sort of tested and has evolved over time and we have great conviction behind it. Therefore if youre meeting the minimal standard on code compliant you know we ought to feel a fair degree of confident that this is quite good. While i understand how sophisticated all these different computer modeling systems are and as you mentioned there is a variety of them out there that somebody can choose to use i am always more skeptical it isnt the one that we have the greatest experience with and a computer can model something and in the interest of doing these proscriptive designs we may accept according to the computer models it meets our minimum and while we love them to do more were not in any way charged or able to be sure that a proscriptive because it is based on possibly less practical experience maybe exceeds to have some margin of error that this is based on a computer model, not long history, and accepted practice. Do you have any feelings that you know perhaps when were in proscriptive designs that the standards might be more stringent . Well, excuse my correction commissioner. What youre referring to is the Performance Base im sorry. Are the ones not proven over time thank you for it is correction. To provide us with buildings that are safe. The area that is most acutely changing in my professional opinion is the ability to model earthquake performance. The more the professional learns about the behavior earthquakes, the location of earthquakes based on history and were very familiar with the San Andreas Fault as being one of them. The more that the profession learns both at the academic level and the professional level the better i think we will be able to forecast the behavior of a proposed structure under Performance Base Structural Design, and as computer modeling advances i think that will also help to achieve that as well. Keeping in mind i think we all know that the computer used to take up a entire room and now that power rests Something Like a laptop so it takes a lot of computation to provide the modeling that were talking about, and as we have advancement in both software and hardware i believe we will get to a place even better than we are today but that will change over time and it has already changed. Over the last ten years there has been significant advancement in the analysis and modeling of Tall Buildings. Now im not an engineer. Our director is and i welcome any additional comments. Yeah, first of all you know the Performance Base design they need to satisfy the proscriptive design as a minimum [inaudible] the Technology Change like this building and isolation is developed for building and that was in the [inaudible] in the new clear plan and employ the technology here. Also when we develop this building they also need to go through the analysis and on this type of building. Same thing on the high rise building they doing Performance Base because the technology they want more appearance of the building architecturally then to design the building but they need to satisfy the proscriptive design to at a minimum and then have yeah. Okay. Thank you. Thank you and thank you assistant director. We have no more questions for you. Excuse me john and to the director. I am looking forward to a comprehensive report on the changes and maybe you could let us know quarterly. Does quarterly sound fair . So we can expect this quarterly now is what june some time. Some time in june. All right. Thank you again assistant director. Commissioners thank you. Okay. So john john malumed from the city attorneys office. I want to clarify one point made earlier about administrative bulletins. Theyre regulations that the department puts together. Theyre reviewed by the Code Advisory Committee and they do come before the Building Inspection Commission for your consideration and approval. They adopt go to the board of supervisors. But theyre published along with the San Francisco Building Code in its own section and theyre updated oftentimes on a schedule that is independent of the three year code update. Okay. All right. Thank you. Is there any Public Comment on item 8 . Okay. Seeing none which item . So we have to finish the meeting by 1 00 oclock today one commissioner has to leave and we have to have quorum and i will do my best to get through everything but forgive me if we pull items. I would like to go to item 10 madam secretary. Item 10 discussion and possible action regarding a proposed ordinance to require the installation of electric vehicle charging station infrastructure in San Francisco. Hi good morning. Kirt beans dbi technical services. I am just up here to introduce this ordinance. It was developed by the department of environment but it has gone through your Code Advisory Committee for bottom almost a year and a half in developing it so theyre in full support of it as your recommendation shows, but i will let the department of environment explain it to you and answer questions if you like. Good afternoon commissioners and director. I am with the department of environment. I will have a brief presentation to set the stage for and context for the ordinance thank you for your time. So were coming to you as kirk mentioned after performing a interagency Staff Working Group to look at what would be effective in terms of supporting development of electric Vehicle Infrastructure in San Francisco and subsequently working excuse me, that Staff Working Group included Planning Department, Building Department, of course environment, and a number of subdivisions within the Building Department as well, and subsequently then we have gone to of course the Code Advisory Committee and subcommittee about 11 times over the year and a half as well as outreach to Affordable Housing developers, other stakeholders including builders and engineers, specialists vendors because this did have to look at new technologies considering what is appropriate and really and also theres an ongoing discussion with Market Rate Developers who have a particular concerns with regard to costs so coming out of that discussion the Code Advisory Committee have unanimously recommended the ordinance to you and i will give a little context why they came to that conclusion. So a major motivator of course of this effort is electric vehicles are a cleaner transportation and this is part of San Franciscos longterm effort to meet the Greenhouse Gas mitigation goals which have been remarkably successful in under lining there is not necessarily a choice between the environment and the economy. The citys economy has grown considerably over 20 years. The population increased and we use the buildings more intensively and have more of them and the Greenhouse Gas in San Francisco have gone down more than 20 . Since there are relatively few members in the community that think about the reduction of Greenhouse Gas emissions and zero501 hundred roots and zero waste and 50 by sustainable modes and sequesters Greenhouse Gas emissions back into plants and the soil. And important in having those goals is a number of them are set on the basis of the citys responsibility, the best available science says as a city bounded on three sides by water its our respond to demonstrate that we can cut emissions by 80 or more through 2050. But the question is raised can we actually get that done and what is the economic and what are the other implications of that . We worked in detail with siemens over the last year and a half to look at the range of activities necessary and changes throughout the market including the grid itself, the built environment and our transport systems necessary for the goals to be achieved and they did find its technically feasible and that a early core element of course is reducing emissions in transport and there are considerable job opportunity and that the job impacts of the system are electrifying individual vehicles as well as improving the electrification of the use of Car Share Services such as a number of them headquartered in the city. Another major consideration of course is do people actually want these vehicles . And its a fundamental one and what is interesting step back from San Francisco and look gloapally and banks and auto makers are tracking the growth of the electric Vehicle Market in the coming years and the bottom line theyre regularly revising their estimates upward and theyre not environmental groups. This is morgin stanley, bpn perritace and globally and the total number of vehicles globally be in the range of this amount electric and see similar comments from auto makers and yet u. S. Auto makers have brought electric vehicles into the product line even though they return to the mass market in 2011 so that is important context because thats you know a global very broad picture and also what is going on in San Francisco . Turns out San Francisco is a hot spot regardless how you draw the blocks around the city for plug in electric vehicle adoption and a major limiting factor that could limit the growth is the infrastructure and fundamentally links most of the citys buildings already exist and they were design and built before electric vehicles were available in the market so the availability extent charging to them has greater cost and so looking at in a little more detail i will breeze through to have mercy on you but we do recognize that plug in electric vehicle adoption will vary considerably regionally and of course wealthier countries are likely to be places where there is turnover in Passenger Vehicles and a greater concentration. Within the United States its basically california alone that makes the United States a Global Electric vehicle hot spot. Half of the electric vehicles in the United States are on californias roads. Within california that growth in electric vehicle use and adoption is concentrated in San Francisco, los angeles and san diego, so mostly a coastal cities, and the growth while they still do represent a minority of vehicles in the road the growth is faster than the projections that the air Resources Board created in the zero plug in electric vehicle action plans. Within pg e territory putting this another way their data indicates that pg e is the largest number on electric vehicles on the traveling roads that are served by its utility infrastructure in the nation and there is about 2400 new electric vehicles on the road in pg e territory and largely concentrated here in the bay area. And that adds up to local Adoption Rate of eight times the National Average and context of growth of electric vehicles in california was a large driver for why the state adopted a requirement that New Buildings as of the 2013 Green Building standards code, the update that went into effect in july 2015 began to require New Buildings not to have electric Vehicle Chargers installed but have infrastructure so it would be as straightforward as possible to install electric Vehicle Chargers and currently the states requirement that is for a new non residential Building Spaces need to be electric vehicle ready and no charger installed but can readily do it and have the services to do so and for new residential 3 of spaces. The proposal that were bringing to you from the Code Advisory Committee today is to ask the question what would be necessary to maximize flexibility . Because as the electric Vehicle Market grows it will change over the life of a building so the question is what is the level of preparedness appropriate for New Buildings delivered today and tomorrow and the next years and what is the level that is appropriate for the expected groaghtsd of electric vehicles use among residents and occupants of the buildings . And what were aiming for is a least cost up front solution that would enable even 100 electric fleet accommodated by New Buildings citywide. This proposal is focused entirely on new construction and major alterations and i want to underscore that major alterations is intentionally a very high bar and its a definition that existed in the Green Building code for eight years and this would not modify the applicability of this definition of major alteration so its i project 25,000 square feet in area and significant change significant structural improvement to the building and based on existing dbi definition of that and also mechanical electrical and plumbing upgrade so thats essentially a definition designed to capture the fact that we do frequently have buildings that everything but new construction and only when its very large scale and so the proposal in a nutshell is that the buildings electrics service should be sized to accommodate simultaneously chairnling of the standard level which is level two which is a 40amp or 240volt circuit depending two, three phase wiring so be able to provide level two charge to 20 of the Parking Spaces simultaneously and then in addition 10 of actual Parking Spaces be fully wired with a circuit from the infrastructure to the parking space so its called turn key electric vehicle readiness that the activity that would be necessary to add electric vehicle charging to that space is installation of a charger or an additional 10 of spaces asks would be required is either the same thing, another fully wiring ten spaces or optionally just running an empty conduit and pull string sized at that level so its straightforward to install the circuit but you also have the option if the Vehicle Owner desired a different level of amerrage for any number of reasons you would have flexibility and not pulling out wire to change the sizing. For the remaining spaces draft ordinance would require would be design documents for how you would ultimately be able to expand charging to any other space in a building but not installing the Service Panels, nor the conduit for the spaces. Only indicating where on those conduit runs, down to that levelef detail its its run through the space and otherwise more expensive and difficult to access post construction so its really long way of saying essentially a sleeve through a deck or a wall in most cases and only installing those sleeves in those cases and having space to accommodate additional Electrical Panels when its necessary. A common question and a guiding principle working on the ordinance is flexibility so one key element i would like to highlight there is an electric vehicle ultimately a battery and electric motor and the more power that can be supplied the faster the battery can be charged so the level of charging the ordinance is based on the Industry Baseline is accessible by any vehicle in the market today but theres a number of options that could provide greater amounts of power and the ordinance specifically tries not to be in the way of voluntarily upgrading to the other alternatives so theres a trade off if a fast charger is installed the building could trade off installation of a fast charger against and reduce the number of ready spaces by five spaces so its kind of four to one. We have looked in some detail at cost effectiveness and i think that is a lot of what we discuss and we continue again to discuss with wide range of stakeholders. We took the team that analyzed the same issue for the state of california for the Building Standards Commission and the cost model they developed in look in great detail and Service Panel and all the way down to the receptacle so all components affected by the policy and Companies Energy solutions and we have the lead consultant present today. They then for both San Francisco, oakland and the city of fremont looked at readjusted the cost model looking in detail of the specific components necessary for larger circumstances examined by the state but in this case still focused on smaller new residential buildings where we expect the greatest level of concern and care would need to be taken particularly for new Affordable Development and it is two scenarios they looked at was new residential building with 12 Parking Spaces and another one with 60 spaces and bottom line was they then looked in detail of the difference in cost for doing this level of preparedness with new construction and adding after the fact. Found it was more than a 65 savings by doing putting in the effort now and that was broken down in detail between differences great detail of differences of permitting cost, overall construction management, applying both rs means and other resources to calibrate the estimate for San Francisco costs and then vetting that with dbi Electrical Team which gave us great feedback and did lead to some upgrades in the model as well as a wide array of stakeholders from electricians to major builders and what you see is the results. Nonetheless the comment that is apt and said by the Advisory Committee when they expressed unanimous support for the ordinance those cost estimates nonetheless are not necessarily applicable to a larger building where there is more complicated infrastructure and will be a different cost and so thats where were continuing to work with developers of new large buildings to better document that consideration, but the Code Advisory Committee even considering that difference and expected cost did believe that a accurate cost for large buildings would nonetheless be well supported based on their own experience and the concept applied. They just wanted to see the estimates better calibrated for new large construction so thats the end of my comments. Thank you for your time this morning. Thank you. Stay there for a second. Were done. The users of this be charged or how would that work . Im sorry. Who would pay to get their vehicle charged . All of the sorts of decisions from the installation where the location of the charger is installed and whether its installed and how power is distributed, whether a charge to the occupant the ordinance would not regulate those things. In some cases there is existing regulation but mostly its voluntarily so to answer the question outside the ordinance typically when a charger is installed at a city facility the city gets the power from the hetch hetchy system and provides that power at no cost. More commonly at sites that are not owned by the city and the charger is not provided by the city a third party and a there is a number of them owns them and the electric Vehicle Owner has a subscription or pays for the power theyre consuming from that particular point and thats passed through to the Building Owner but this ordinance isnt seeking to regulate those transactions, and you know its theres a lot of flexibility on that front but we expect people to generally pay for the power they consume. Thank you. Commissioner lee. Thank you. Its a worthwhile proposal but i want to cut to the chase with my question because lack of time. How about the supply side of the electricity . What i am saying were putting the guts in the building and were ready for charging stations. I am concerned about the buildings that are under major alteration. For a new building we can plan for it in the future. In the existing buildings when we have to renovate how do we handle that and the Utility Company provide you the extra thats a great question and one that the director had a lot of emphasis on and make sure a suitable answer was provided in the ordinance so theres a couple of layers. Even in the alteration there is two pass. If the scope of the major alteration includes scope of electric service and paying pg e for the upgrade of the service then the ordinance applies fully. If instead in your major alteration youre not subscribing to new Electrical Service or upgrading then the ordinance directs the owner to only install charging infrastructure up to the level this ordinance doesnt cause that upgrade. At the next level if there is new service in a new building or major alteration the ordinance has a cap in the code and that is for upgrades on the utility side of the meter where the Building Owner does compensate pg e for upgrades that are specific to their own service, not to the general distribution infrastructure but their service, which can include a transformer and can be variable in costs theres a cap of 400 per parking space so that was a point debated at some length and because although labor costs and other cost efficients are much higher in. Factors are much higher in San Francisco and pg e said that was consistent in the territory so we kept that number. Commissioner warshell. A couple. You mentioned roof sequestering of carbon and the availability of power s there any provision in this to encourage solar roof conversions simultaneously to generate your own power . The ordinance we wouldnt recommend that the department of environment recommend that the Building Code take that action. Sorry. We try to encourage only adoption of Building Code regulations that are directly enforceable by the department but at a programmatic level we work with a organization that is we actually host them in our office, the Business Council on Climate Change which provides a non government nonprofit convening voice for companies that wish to contribute to mitigating our Climate Crisis and they run a program called sun shares and offers reduced cost for purchase of photo voltaic installation and do rfp so vendors can compete and youre likely upgrading the electric panel and offer the electric vehicle in the course of that. And that has been offered to all city employees, to wide array of the biggest employers in San Francisco, google and gentech and so on so that concept is certainly important and valuable and we see it happening more and more though we wouldnt recommend require tg in a regulation. Thank you. You do bring up the point of support and subsidy and clearly San Francisco is kind of at the forefront of early adopter on this, but recently the federal subsidy for purchase of electric vehicles is coming under question or challenge and has your group been able to evaluate the likely effect of federal policy changes likely adaptation rates or is that too speculative at this point . Its fairly speculative and we encourage the federal government to maintain that support while at the same time while somewhat famously the first vehicle that demonstrated success were luxury vehicles. You have a growing array of subcompact vehicles affordable without the subsidy as well as not to toot any particular company but as an example eslafamously is bringing the model s and the price point is within others of that size and capacity and i think there would be a legitimate argument what is the role of incentives as the technology matures . Its a period its certainly to have them but the two epi centers of preregistration for model s are San Francisco and los angeles. Absolutely and that also does bring up the question about having the lower rates of required spaces if you have the fast chargers because it seems that more people you know are attracted to the Luxury Brands theyre the people that demand the highest level of service, so having a sharp reduction in number of spaces to get faster charging seems like it could be counterproductive in this particular market where in particular people demand luxury cars but super charging as almost a given, so i was a little scwiky on that one. Fast charging is not limited to tesla and any reference or the thresholds in the ordinance are not intentionally calibrated for any individual product other than the Industry Standard level two charging and then a minimum threshold for fast charging that is intentionally lenient and include a super charger of that particular brand and a wide array of other faster than level two chargers. So the last we try to apply is the core item of greatest importance is there is sufficient Electrical Service that power can be allocated to the vehicles and that the decisions about what type of charging, what the rate for the use of the charging, what the speed of charging applied other than the floor set in the ordinance should be left to the market, particularly the Building Owner and developer and the particular program that is going to be applied at their site. Thank you very much for answering the questions and doing this work. This is incredibly important and i look forward at some point to having an electric vehicle and thank you for laying infrastructure. I actually would have questions but i would like to go to Public Comment and call you back and close out. Okay. Call for Public Comment madam secretary. Public comment on item 10 . Hello commissioners, director, and president mccarthy. My name is joel colep i work with the San Francisco Electrical Construction industry. Im the director of Sustainable Energy solutions. Im an electrician by trade and work in the office now and i deal with Renewable Energy systems, micro grids, Energy Storage and what not. I wanted to give add commissioner. Commissioner. Yeah, i am here on thursdays down the hall but today i am speaking from my day job hat so i would like to shed a couple comments about the topic that will put this into more practical context. One thing i want to say that will tell you where the market is going i went to a press event at the rockwell which is a recently completed building on pine between franklin and van ness near whole foods and have multiple electric vehicle charging stations installed. I speak with the newer residents that just moved in and said look weve got double digit numbers of Parking Spaces that havent been by the residents and we have our electric vehicle spaces over here that have been sold out since day one and number of spaces were purchased by residents have gasoline cars so what that says that even the people that dont currently have a electric vehicle will get at some point a electric vehicle so these smais spaces are are in demand and thats where its going. I wanted give a brief construction context of what is means to kind of think about things ahead and install things easier and more cheaply if you kind of think about things on the front end and plan for the technologies. Lets just say were going to build this room from the ground up and theres going to be an Electrical Panel over there and have the charging station over here. Before they procedure the ground floor slab of concrete it could take an electrician like me maybe 30 minutes to install the conduit path way from this way to this wall. Being soath its in concrete the materials are cheaper. We will use plastic one opposed to later on when the slab is pulled and use a metallic condue scpit costs more and more rigorous to install and most fastening involved and going up and down the ladder and what not, so once that slab is poured my conduit, the path way is in place and shorter distance and installed over a lot less hours of time saving on labor and materials opposed to coming back down the road after the knowledge is finished and building is finished and install the conduit and take longer to install so once again the spirit and the idea of thinking about this ahead of time planning for it in the beginning and being able to install it more cheaply and more easily after the fact so were here strongly in support of the language and i hope you do so too. Thank you. Thank you commissioner. Youre going to get me in trouble because i gave you extra time there. More Public Comment please. Hello commissioners. Director, mike mc cone developer of the rockwell. I am here to speak on behalf of the Development Community. Were very supportive of the ordinance. Were lucky enough to develop a luxury product in San Francisco that was well received. This ordinance of course would apply to all housing. We see for sale and apartment communities having different needs. I do think that i have been working with the department of environment staff and they have been wonderful to work with. We do have a concern about the broad reach and theres a difference between upgrading the system that will allow it in the future and what is put in the building on the outset and were sensitive to housing costs in San Francisco, so while we support the ordinance we will be working with staff and the Mayors Office to hopefully right size it in our opinion. We put in 31 charnlers at rockwell and represents 15 of the Parking Spaces. We didnt sell out from day one. We still have four remaining that may not get sold. Of the 27 we have sold only six are in use, so that represents around what is that . Around 5 actually less, 3 , so i want to clarify that. Its important that we build for the future. We recognize that and in for sale luxury housing there is a demand. They will get sold and used. A little concerned about the overall effect on all the housing in San Francisco. Thank you for your time. Thank you for your comments. Next speaker please. Heres a private citizen that lives in the shipyard a new developed thing. I am on the board for the hoa and the condo side and nothing was done to build in electric vehicle stations in the buildings and we have owners with electric vehicles and were figuring how to get them charged and predone and prebuilt and easy to install and mentioned by the planning commissioner who isnt here as a commissioner today and simply do to the work and easier if they put them into the system and the owners can back fill it in without it being thousands of dollars of modifications to the building to get it done and i highly encourage you and do whatever you can as quickly as you can and the buildings are constantly approved and the shipyard is done for 20 years and most is done and passing things done for that and the better it will be the quicker you do it and we have people in our building and have issues and how do they charge and theyre using not the right spots and i encourage you to move forward with the department and will help the homeowners in the city. Thank you. Thank you for your comments. Next speaker please. Hi commissioners. I didnt expect to pop in here but i came in to talk to joel and this was on the agenda. My name is alex and i live not far from jason but outside the shipyard. I worked in the sustainable issues for quite some time and i think and without making a comment on this particular legislation i hope you think what youre proing to do here and other things that come at a building and district level and look at the appropriate scale for some of the for emerging technology. For Something Like this where you have users, residents in a building it may in fact be incredibly appropriate to have the charging stations within the buildings itself and right to the end user. Larger systems whether district or micro grids, things like that, need to take a step back. Im not saying make a decision one way or other but down the line think about where the appropriate scale is in order to get the highest utilization because thats ultimately our end goal. Thank you. Thank you for your comments. Is there anymore Public Comment . I see none so we can close Public Comment. Commissioners i will yeah, as somebody 12 years ago now i built my house and put solar panels in and in the fog and everybody is look at me like im crazy and i have a charnler and charger and its out dated and there is no electric vehicle one in the garage and it shocked me how long to get to this point and the stats today are encouraging and i believed that many years ago so what we have in front of us is something we have to do and happen and i guess the question is the implementation plen of it and the comments so as a builder and the commissioners are tired of me hearing this what is the unintended consequences regarding to the installation . What is the cost for a small builder . I talked to some of the Building Community they outreachd and we havent been invited to sit at the table. You did mention there were builders there so there were a lot of questions for example do we have to do a different set of plans to demonstrate for dbi and another added cost and one thing uch touched on was the small buildings and most want to do this and positive marketing thing and a lot of the users of these are kind of buying the smaller products and the larger homes in town so theres no resistance there in doing it but one of the challenges that were having and commissioner lee can help me out with this when we do exceed our load limits pg e for example if you have 400asms and pg e and the fast charger and in the calculations and put you over that amount and triggers off a transformer and triggers for someone that did one in the neighborhood of 150,000 to install when doing the right thing and with that said i am asking the commission if its possible is not to move this on today and if we could sit down with the smaller builder and talk about the language and anything we can do as it goes forward on that and particularly on the upgrading and working with dpw if we have to because its very difficult to get a transformer in a sidewalk. Its very dism. The requirements you have to leave it inside the building and these issues i want a good understanding and all of the departments are on board when trying to do the right thing as builders in the community and i am wondering commissioners if its okay . We could bring it back next month. I could set up a time to talk to the stakeholders and language that talks more to that so i am wondering if there is any point of view with that. Thats fine. Thats fine. I am interested to hear comments on that if you have any. The timing at the discretion of the commission and yeah, so we can bring it back next month and i know there is language we would like to write in here and if we do that and move forward that is great so as you go to the other commission and so ons its not watered down when it gets there. I would appreciate that. Sorry. I know i shouldnt be doing this but if you have something to say. Sure. Commissioners. I i am with the department of environment. Just to add to your knowledge and information. The department is working with the Mayors Office and supervisor tang who are both the sponsors of this item. They would like to move this item in april and its scheduled to go to land use so i think its an issue of typing associated when they want to take it up in land use. And also wanting to hear your input and thoughts. Certainly the department is committed to working with all stakeholders and were committed it to do that but make sure that the commission understands that the mayor and the supervisor want to move forward in april given its earth month and advance the ordinance in that process. I just wanted to share that. Thank you. So when is the land use hearing . Do we know . Commissioners i am from the department t of the environment. The Land Use Committee that the supervisors, Mayors Office and our office has been looking at is either moving it before land use depending on their agenda schedule either april 10 or 17th. Okay. When is our next meeting . April 19. Okay. So that misses both of the dates then. Commissioner lee. Im not trying to be obstructive is there urgency its heard on april 10 or 17th in land use . The item was introduced earlier and were using the 30 day wait process for the items. This item is also going to the environment commissions for action this month and take us out close to almost 60 days of date of introduction so thats why we were looking for those earlier dates. Is it possible to postpone it one week instead of the 17th its on the Land Use Committee on the 24th which would make it after our 19th meeting . Certainly the department is supportive. We dont control the agenda but were happy to take the message back to the supervisor and the Mayors Office and i dont believe there is any opposition to do that. Certainly it would have our recommendation as well. Yeah, i feel theres probably not a whole lot of concern but it sounds like we want to reach out to the small builders and make sure they understand the legislation and how it affects them. Certainly and the department of the environment supports that and welcomes that conversation. Okay. So is there anymore we closed Public Comment. We did close Public Comment, didnt we . There needs to be a motion to continue the item to the next meeting. Could you make the motion . Lets move to continue the item until next month. Next meeting. Next meeting. Okay. Thats the motion. Is there a second . Second. So theres a motion and a second to continue the item to the april 19 motion. I will do a roll call vote on the motion. Presid. President mccarthy. Yes. Commissioner konstin. Yes. Commissioner lee. Yes. Commissioner warshell. Yes. That motion carries unanimously. Okay. So the clock against us here. Maybe i can talk to so i would like to lets see so i think we should go to what items can we not can we move the litigation to the next months meeting . Sure. Those are just procedural. They can be moved to next month. Okay. Lets do that. Commission questions number 6. Do we actually have to hear that today . You dont have to. The commissioners need to contact you or i about the items. We dont have to hear them. Okay. So there is no objection there. So what item have we left . Nine. We have nine. And 11. Nine and 11. 12. Nine, 11 and 12. Kirk could i get you for a second here . Thank you. To the mic please. Thank you. I know one of the items i continued before. Would it possible and accommodate us sure its no problem. We will lose a commissioner and cant take action and bad against the time table. It doesnt create any problem at all. Okay. Thank you. We will bring all the items next month. Directors report. Do we have to deal with that . No. Okay. All right. So we will continue that to next one. Approval of minutes. I would like to get that done. Okay. So item 14 review and approval of the minutes of the regular meeting of october 19, 2016. I move that we approve. Second. Is there Public Comment on item 14 . Okay. Seeing none are all commissioners in favor. Aye. Aye. Any opposed . Okay. The minutes are approved and item 15 review and approval of the minutes of the regular meeting of november 16, 2016. I move to approve. Second. Okay. Motion and a second fltd is there any Public Comment . Seeing none are all commissioners in favor . Aye. Aye. Any opposed . Okay. The minutes are approved. [inaudible] [off mic] okay. And for the record we need to make a motion to continue the items that you said were going to continue. I make a motion i will mention the numbers. I will move to continue item 4, five, six, nine, 11 and 12, 13. Well done. To the next meeting. Okay. Second . Second. Okay. So theres a motion and a second to continue those items. Is there any Public Comment . Seeing none are all commissioners in favor . Aye. Aye. Okay. Any opposed . None. Item 16 adjournment. Is there a motion to adjourn . Move. Move to adjourn. Second . Second. Okay. Commissioners in favor . Aye. Aye. Opposed . We are now adjourned. Its 12 52 p. M. Thank you. Thank you good afternoon, everyone and welcome to the todays event ill rick your mc for this average you know me as a sports coast for abc 7 my mom says i am an american born chinese im excited to be here thats because of my chinese heritage and i love sports very much so im the first chineseamerican Television Sports coast in this country i am proud and old at the same time ive been covering sports in the bay area since 1987 during that time i working closely with the wirings in 2015 i was invited be part of unveiling of jersey for the wiringsburg during many season he took part along with mayor ed lee and the wirings president rick and former warriors the warriors are activity in the chinese up community in chinatown along with the Chinese New Year for the past 6 seasons some of the warriors take part in question and answer through wave have a hybrid between facebook and fweert theyre the most followed with 3 million formals were here to make exciting news about the warriors participation in the innocence nba more the 2017 preseason before the details id like to introduce ourselves guest speakers first of all, warriors cfo rick wells. clapping. San Francisco mayor ed lee. clapping. from the mayor looks grumpy i lost the nasdaq tournament out of the office pool now laughter we have the executive Vice President howard ticket. clapping. the San Francisco chamber of commerce president and coo cal i cant heart. clapping. the bay Area Business Dell Christian and from the United Airlines mike hannah. clapping. there are also some people in the audience to be recognized we have the president of the Chinese Chamber of commerce mr. Chang clapping. the chief the protocol mr. Smurlths honored to have he hear and from the United Airlines Melinda Franklin okay. clapping. we would like to bring up to the podium the president and cfo for the warriors mr. Rick wells mr. Rick. clapping. thank you, thank you great day rick also nice to have you been part of this so were here today to announce the rosemary i warriors will be making their third trip to china this october 2nd games between the minnesota tinder wolves in shanghai well be the nba team traveled to china more than any other tomato in the history. clapping. the first change to go there and hear Amazing Things our second trip to our sister city shanghai well get to visit the nba in hits desirability is such a global trend ive had a front row seat to watch that waterproofsables are years i was in charge of the International Offices and had the thierl to be part of opening of our very First International one Person Office in melbourne as you traditional it is amazing to see the hundreds of employees and the offices all over the world to promote this support of basketball and the nba for the nba there is no question that china is the single most important mashthd outside for the basketball it is the most Important Team sport Staten Island one hundred Million People play basketball and again, economically did most important place outside of the United States for the nba for the warriors i think we do that exactly the is that you not only because the great connection to china but your Asian Community here in the bay area but for our business as well we 345i6r7b9d the Warriors Team is the new haven selling team in a china not surprisingly we were the. clapping. the first team to create all chinese language website we were the first team to launch wave have and now more wave have in china 0 more than any other team we celebrate the new year with especially created jersey to celebrate china it is something well do thought future and our players in addition to the time warriors that team jeff curry and draymond all on thats what its all about their own team spent a lot of time in china and last week we were talking about this announcement made plans do go back to china this year an amazing opportunity the purpose the players individually as well as so for the nba and if this is not enough the warriors in Oklahoma City not a that a game will be on tv as their game of the week were thrilled that were part of this wouldnt have been possible without the partners this is what i think as we get the opportunity to showcase San Francisco a welcoming place to our chinese friends we look down this year the people that make a happy everyday for the most part our first chineseamerican mayor he came on the last trip and very much the reason that we have the four square block 11 pile of dirt in mission bay that will be the new chase center to open in 2019 a fan of the warriors but a friend of warriors and San Francisco partner in everything we do with were thrilled the challenging chamber it here ive been getting fab reviews you might consider quieting the Bay Area Council traveled with us to china and doing that again in one of the first Founding Partners at chase center United Airlines to be part of what we do in the city and obviously the connection between the bay area and china thats where we want to be as the warriors no reason the warriors cant be the team that the fans in china most society with the nba and through that the association with the bay area in San Francisco and that is the big part why were doing this and hoping to accomplish so thank for having us youre welcome to come to china im going to turn it over to rick thank you. clapping. thank you, rick if you have an extra seat im on it okay next have the mayor the San Francisco mayor ed lee to come up he got literally off the plane from a goodwill trip to hong kong. clapping. thank you, rick and for being worked out great sports coast for the local bay area stations i want to, of course, thank rick the warriors and if it is exciting for kids for families and just coming back from the far east you have to understand that charlotte does every time we met ones an International Trip our welcoming weer to the rest of the world particular is a party and i came from vietnam you know that with our sister city and hong kong with the chamber as an International Gift weve got to really understand how San Francisco is more than welcoming we have 80s Cultural Gifts were exchanging with other countries and it is more than what we see it is i think during this time rather than countries giving each other challenges they rather see gifts of a cultural and now with your sports teams that is even more wellreceived thank you to all the sponsors here from our Bay Area Council to United Airlines to the chamber of commerce and the sfaefl and all the partners that the warriors have this announcement is significance for the world were a gateway to the far east and we will continue to be a gateway with those kinds of gifts the nba allows the warriors to do you want imagine how valuable a warrior sitter is in china ive been asked several times to bring some over as International Gifts they dont want appropriations they want a warrior gifted and you know this is amazing when the kids of government officials give me one of these i dont care what you have to do and you know the main warriors, of course, is extremely popular but now it has that imvote of coming from San Francisco it is almost as if it was made in San Francisco the brand is extremely popular but as importantly is the teamwork the acceptance that your giving more than a sports team a values of group collaboration, of teamwork, of great plays of innovation that the team really representatives that is extremely popular all over china to have it in places it is one the hot beds of extension in all of concern china to be complimented by shanghai is an audience of tremendous impact so i want to say thank you to the warriors for including us of course, october will be another one the exciting times because theyll have already parades through the country hopefully with yet another win and we look forward to that you know, i must say that sports continues to be be an International Language in and of itself thats why i appreciate the Chinese Chamber here that is going to probably. Wage again, the Community Support that the warriors have given all the communities of San Francisco and not just Chinese Community i know Filipino Community and Asian Community all the ethnic organizations that are diverse in the bay area welcomed to the games thats why i them comfortable at the games when you go there on our games you see people from youll different backgrounds there yelling and screaming but also for the team and also just recognizing the value of diversities in the San Francisco bay area have that recommended open on the teams of players and ownership of the management that represents that diversities extremely well and make sure that that is a part of the discussions whenever the warriors with introduced it is more than a Basketball Team it is a welcoming sign of the United States of america in my opinion this is great for San Francisco and another wonderful win i cant wait for the chase center to open up more than basketball by International Groups to colonel together and celebrate and have what i think the Airlines Want more travel all across this will be wonderful for their hub in the San Francisco bay area to gragsdz and sfaefl will be smiling and china is sf is one of the successful entities for linking us up and investment if china and is companies and the Chamber Representatives over to china that is also helping to stabilize and normalized a lot of activities that wouldnt happen trade, friendship, Cultural Gifts, sports gifts theyre all being worked out interpreting welcome at this time because i think that what ask necessary more than ever is giving each other gifts rather than challenges all over the world and this is what the warriors are doing for us so thank you very much. clapping. thank you, mayor ed lee next we would like to invite to the 0 podium the executive Vice President of sfaefl howard picking even though. clapping. thank you, mr. Mayor youre right about one thing wife been smiling about this opportunity since weve talked with rick about that chinese is for 0 more important market for those in San Francisco the Faster International market the largest and been the most money when it comes to the market the market weve had our eye open to have a podium to work with the warriors and technique with the chinese customers and operators and the different people we do with a podium of a brand like the warriors is unmatched for obvious we are excited about the the subject property and going on the mission bringing our partners along because it gives our be partners an opportunity for great assess for you operators that are excited about this so give context for china about a half a million visits every year and spend one . 7 billion in the city that is an important market and the faster growing in a business and spending stand point were looking forward to this opportunity thank you for thinking about us and including us were excited about going to china and talking about San Francisco thank you clapping. thank you howard next we would like to invite to come up to the podium the San Francisco chamber of commerce president and coo caylee heart. clapping. well as you can tell from my stuart i didnt have a long career in basketball, however, olympian more than a a long time and nothing brings people closer it together than sports for partnerships and building bridges thank you to the warriors and everyone to have me out to celebrate this cleaver the mayor is correct an incredible partnering with the center to the chamber of commerce and we have sorry about that chief scotting relationships since 2008 a couple of things i want to talk about that effort has resulted in the recruitment or over 70 businesses thousands of jobs created, hundreds and thousands of leads and then over 5 billion in Economic Activities right here in the city city in the bay area. clapping. so thank you, mayor for that partnership the Economic Impact it obviously incredible important but relationships that i think weve talked about the partnerships and conflicting things overseas and commerce can build bridges and relationships bridge that gap between things we dont have common areas we at the chamber are committed to those kinds of partnerships and watching from home and celebrating as usual cheering on the warriors. Thank you for the opportunity this is an Incredible Opportunity well see a lot of Economic Activity and continued friendship there is those kinds of things ive been practicing and would like to sings chow chow. clapping. okay. Thank you and next, we have the Bay Area Council chief of Global Business development the all the way down christian center. clapping. thank you, rick im very happy to be here and honored with rick wells and mayor ed lee who went on the trip with us last year, it was visa exciting do go had in 2013 with the warriors it was an easy ticket to sell we filled United Airlines carriers to go and United Airlines a one great partner to go to china and the work in china we appreciate that all the work with them but the 2ri7 last time and this time was tyler and exciting the stadiums filled up the fan base in china is extraordinary and i think that youre going to do well, there that is appropriate that the warriors are taking the lead for the nba because San Francisco and the bay area are the bridge to china and always been the bridge to china the fact that youre going to shin descend if youre doing business with schien you need to do that on behalf of the Bay Area Council you have our full support ill be going on the trip it was decided friday by me and laughter i very much look forward to that so thank you so much for your leadership. clapping. okay. Thank you dell by the way, for those of you who dont know united arld is not just the official airlines for the warriors but the for chase status quo sports and Entertainment Center we hope to have in 2019, 2020 nba season now to represent the United Airlines the Vice President of the Operation Mike hannah. clapping. thank you, rick what im hoping we have faith we have faith in rick here and, of course, everyone else in the bay area leakage honor and privilege to be here and stand proud with an amazing brand like united and, of course, like the Golden State Warriors as well as the amazing city in San Francisco last fall when we announced the partnership it was an amazing, amazing time and ill tell you why Joe Dimaggios taking an aircraft hanger we dont heavy maintenance and rebuild engines and anything you like to do on an airplane and transform it into a Basketball Court with a the warriors logo in the center and put a lapsed and have rick join us and the players and announce on Muslim Partnership thats how we started and here abused of comboirz in the city of San Francisco being worked out the worlds best city were proud to sponsor the warriors and it is the sounding partner of is chase Center Brings happiness not only to mitchel and 13 thousand employees but 86 thousand employees around the global through the sponsoring with the warriors our customers will see assess for premium seats and vip experienced and, of course, the warriors all graphed items pretty well cool, huh as we head into the playoffs all i can say youll soon soon soon see a truly Great Partnership for the united customers and, of course, warriors fans as excited as i am to be part of this announcement that the warriors are more thrilled this is about the warriors expanding into china for the third time united was did first carrier over thirty years ago over thirty years ago theyre the leading u. S. Carrier in all of atas fly to more nonstop cities 6 chinese designations by a shrink and hong kong and, of course, honk joe last year, we launched routes and connected from Silicon Valley with chinese Silicon Valley and the first u. S. Carrier from u. S. Home of chinas first define city and the warriors at united our shared purpose connecting people and oountd the world no place else than sfta San Francisco were the global gateway to china we fly 11 daily flights serve 11 million passengers nine hundred flight a day out of sfo and recently announced were expanding to 5 any market value sin national and, of course, in san rose will fly to San Francisco as well this summer were expanding to new orleans and montana previously not severed during the summer months and the support off our communitybased organizations organizations lecturer the San Francisco opera and Asian Art Museum and, of course, boys and girls club and supporting the community allows us to give back to the San Francisco bay area and absolutely amazing to give back to the people that live right here on behalf of the 13 thousand employees in the bay area so ladies and gentlemen, the hometown carrier and by far in my opinion the best carrier be were proud to partner with the city of San Francisco, of course, be rick and the entire Warriors Team were proud of and the chamber and sfaefl and very, very happy to be here go warriors, go