Stay updated with breaking news from Arnie lerner. Get real-time updates on events, politics, business, and more. Visit us for reliable news and exclusive interviews.
both the federal ada and california building codes. presentation by regina dick- endrizzi and neil friedman. good evening, small business commissioners and building inspection commissioners. i am here before you this evening to talk about small businesses and disability access, and issues that have been before both of our commissions regarding, sort of, how do businesses get informed in addition to the lawsuits that have been transferring transpiring over the last five years. over the last couple of years, our department s director day, my office, the mayor s office on disability we have been discussing what we can do to help educate our small businesses and de-mystify the requirements they need to abide by. what we have heard over the years, in terms of our small businesses and dealing with the requirements, is that there is a lack of understanding of what the laws are, and that these laws are primarily civil rights laws. but they are also accompanied with buildi ....
accessibility requirements and the fact that one may get a sign off and a permit of occupancy but still may not be needing federal ada requirements. many of these businesses, our small businesses, when they are engaged with dbi are doing work which is under the above which and fresh will. then they are required to spend that additional 20% toward making accessibility requirements. but that may not bring them into full compliance under the federal ada. also, many of these small businesses may not even engage with the department of building inspection. their tenant improvements may be putting something on the walls, putting in some countries, may be adding shelves. there is no opportunity to engage with the department of building inspection in order to have the department take a look and work with them on some accessibility improvements. we have seen a number of businesses that have incurred these lawsuits. they bought their business as a turnkey operation. there is not a ....
there is going to be all sorts of activity. there is going to be a change management between the various departments. suggestion probably nine months ago, and i want to make it again tonight. is there a possibility at all that you could create a timeline for your goals that people can see before the rfp phase? we could call it a discovery phase of what is going to be implemented. some target dates. i know we do not want to hang ourselves and put ourselves under the thumb of deadlines, but they also help keep us focused. is there any possibility we can do something like that? there is an rfp that got us to the last point before they come to interview in the last process of doing this election. it is to come in front of the steering committee. those time frames are in me in the rfp. after that, it gets murky until we can see what is proposed by the various vendors. we should have a much better idea after march 3 i mean on march 3. they are due on march 2. i can writ ....
review using statute code 305. the house has been determined to be eligible for being a potential contributor to a historic district. the department has received for argument from historians about the existence of the district. the district includes 16 contributors, 22 buildings. the department has named other contributors to the district in the past, including eureka. the area was a identified as historically sensitive, but not treated as such. dr analysis states the project was exempted based on a different code, but that is incorrect, as you can see. it is circled. issue two there is protection against cumulative impact on the district. it requires that a leed agent assess environmental impacts the accumulative. cumulative effects are already evidence in the district. projects have been approved and are currently under way that undoubtedly cause a negative affect on the district. nea has not upheld its obligation to look but the cumulative impact on the district. i ....
ortega goes up to the third house. i do not know how 20% or 25% off. we did not survey on the avenue. that is how i would clarify the project. thank you. vice president olague: commissioner more? moore? commissioner moore: the project is code complying. is that correct? the rear yard setback is 15 feet, per requirement? could you repeat? commissioner moore: the rear yard setback is normally 15 feet? in this instance, no. the required rear yard should be 25%. commissioner moore: dissolution we re seeing here is 37%? the solution we are seeing here is 37%. this is an unusually wide lot, wider than the typical san francisco lot. the building sits comfortably in it. if one wanted to be picky, one could say the deck six 6 6 feet further than the projection of the house sits six feet further than the projection of the house next door. i am not sure that rises to a serious concern on my house. the house is a comfortably design house. i think there is nothing one ....