tv Government Access Programming SFGTV May 31, 2019 4:00pm-5:01pm PDT
>> good evening and welcome to the may 22, 2019 of the san francisco board of appeal. president rick swi going wilg we presiding president. at the controls is the board's legal consistent and i'm julie rosenberg, the board's executive director. we will be joined by representatives from the city departments that will have a case before the board this evening, scott sanchez, acting deputy administrator representing the planning
commission and we expect joseph duffy, senior building inspector representing the building department inspection. the board meeting guidelines are as follows. the board requests you turn off or silence cell phones. please carry on conversations in the hallway. for jurisdiction request, parties get three minutes each and no rebuttal. people affiliated must include comments within the three minute period. members have up to three minutes to address the board. please speak into the microphone. to assist the board, you are ask but not required to submit a speakerrer card when come up to speak. speaker cards are available on the left side of the podium. own three votes are required to grant a jurisdiction request.
this women be rebroadcast on friday, july 26. it can be downloaded from sfmovetv.org and now we will swear in or affirm all those who wants to testify. if you intend to testify at any of tonight's proceedings and wish to have the board give your testimony evidentiary wait, stand if you are able and say i do after you've been sworn in or affirmed. do you swear or affirm the testimony you are about to give will be the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth. thank you, and please be seated. item number one is general public comment. this is an opportunity for anyone who would like to speak on a matter within the board's jurisdiction but not on tonight's calendar. any general public comment? any members of the public? i think we can move on. we move on to item number two,
commissioner comments and questions? i'm happy for two things. i'm happy for the warriors and happy i don't live in alabama. thank you. [ laughter ] >> any public comment on that item? so we will move on to item number three, the adoption of the minutes for may 15th, 2019. >> i have a proposed correction to the minutes. under journment adjournment -- >> commissioner tanner did ajourn the meeting. i saw it on tv. >> you were here in spirit. >> yep. >> his spirit banging the gavel. [ laughter ] >> so is there any public comment or do we have a motion first before we have public comment? >> i'll make that motion. >> ok. your motion is to adopt the minutes with the revision from
commissioner lazareth and any public comment? ok, so seeing none, on that motion, commissioner lazareth? that motion carries 4-0. item number 4, jurisdiction request, so 64 deloris street, asking that the board take jurisdiction over building permit application 2016-122250 issued on september 21, 2018 by the department of building inspection. the appeal period ended october 9, 2018 and the jurisdiction request was filed may 2, 2019. the permit holder is veritus investments. it's per ordinance 162-16, single exit, sprinklers required
per nfpa, fire alarm to meet fire code section 1188.8.131.52 under separate permit and we will hear from the requester first. mr. kessler one have three minutes. >> i will disclose i'm a partner in a project that hired julius and they will have no affect on my decision. >> thank you. >> welcome. >> thank you. >> good evening. my name is john kessler and i live at 10 of 4 deloris street, apartment number 7 and i'm here to make a jurisdiction request to the board of appeals. this request concerns 201612225670 for the addition of two dwelling units in the garage at 1064 deloris street. in the interest of time, i will focus on the jurisdiction requested south. i will summarize a few of my concerns. at this point, i would like to
submit letters from three other tenants who couldn't be here but was told by the board of appeals they could be taken into public comment. >> just give them to garry, if you could. >> today or landlord has only confirmed this work is i in the planning stages and provided conflicted assertions about the duration and scope of the project and how it will impact tenants and about their intent to mitigate and/or compensate for any result of services either temporary or permanently, such as garage parking, access to laundry facilities located in the garage and storage lockers also be located in the garage. although the landlord has communicated that they intend to
return parking laundry and storage to the affected tenants, intent is just that. while this project was originally planned to be completed with the mandated soft story retrofit, in an email on may 5, green tree communicated this may be completed separately from the retrofit and this serves to aggravate the situation for tenants as we have to navigate in a result of services and major disruption to the client disruption of homes for two extended projects. the retrofit and then the a department u construction last project. the landlord increased the capacity by 40% to the construction of six additional bedrooms with an existing units and surely add more as remaining units turn over. while i appreciate the fact the landlord posted -- excuse me. i was mistaken about this part. let me amend that.
>> you have 30 seconds. >> i ask the board to refer to et cetera decision on january 2 20, 2019 in which the board ruled the failure to notify tenants prevented them from filing the protest within a 15-day period. >> so i have a few questions. just giv getting the timeline correct, when you call miss dixon the property manager and she said that there was just speculative and they were in the planning but they had permits in hand. >> correct. >> so just -- i have it right here and you spoke to her when? >> i would have to check my email to see what the date was. my next door neighbor, who is actually here, had emailed her and copied me on the email. but that was on or around
february 14th of this year, i believe. >> probably he'll have time for testimony. >> it was february 14th of this year. >> thank you. >> and to elaborate on that, there is protection for tenants, as i think you know, and what you lease is what you get regardless of what happens physically within the building and so that although change is appropriate as long as it abides by the law, if you had a parking place, you'll have that parking place at the end. if you had a storedge unit, you have the same or like at end. ifs there was a laundry facility, if you had one in the first place, there will be one in the second place. may not be in the same location. but is there any reason for you to believe that you will have
less than what you had in the first place or what you have right now after the proposed or after the permitted activities are complete? >> based on the size of the garage area and two apartments in that envelope, it's hard to picture the existing storage parking and laundry existing with two apartments in their -- to confirm, did you ask from your project manager, from the apartment manager or the project managering in general for apple. >> i've asked them for details of the project and assurances about the return of those things. we've asked many questions about in and as i said, they really just have been really vague and saying don't worry about it, we'll work it out. so just for the record, you have
asked for plans. >> i specifically have not asked to see building plans, no. that's for details of the project. >> ok. >> i have a question just to understand how your services will be impacted if you have a lease agreement for parking space or storage or laundry and what is your current use of your unit and common building facilities? >> i didn't quite hear the beginning. >> just a question in terms what will be severed from you or the loss or worry is, is it vacating your unit or your concern that it may not be there? >> i have a parking space in the garage, the laundry machines that are in there which if you'll notice laundry mats aren dangered species in the city.
the parking space, lawn industry facilities. >> and the bike rack. just to give you an idea. >> in your communication, is there any reason to vacate your unit during the construction period? >> that's a good question. just three or four weeks ago, when i say they, i mean the landlord required entry into my apartment to remove a large portion of wall and ceiling to do exploratory demolition and i was able to stay during that process, but more work like that needed to be done, i would have to vacate. i've had to vacate if the past. >> sorry for the huge amount of question.
>> happy to answer. >> they did not supply a brief so we're going in half blind here. so thank you. >> sure. >> thank you very much. i appreciate appreciate it. really appreciate it. >> we'll hear if the attorney for the permit holder. >> thank you. i'm on behalf of the property owner. i think as has been discussed in a previous hearing, this is a jurisdiction request. the question here, did the city intentionally cause the requester to be late in the filing of the appeal? the final issue was notice required of the property owner, the permit holder? dbi has a clear outline of all of the type of work considered substantial alterations that would trigger notice to the neighbors. i think we're all in agreement none of those were triggered and one was, are you doing work in a tenant's space that would require displacement?
none will bees displaced as part of the adu project or seismic upgrade. the city's position on the garage storiage is that i storie severed and like there is use for the seismic work and it requires a 60-day notice to the tenants and i hope what you see in the emails there are of a project manager that while this project is in flux, does the cost ofasm of adus make sense? there were volunteer emails to the jurisdiction requester and because there's a 60-day requirement of notice, that will be required and it's always been the intent of the property owner
to do that when this work moves forward. so from our perspective, the boxes have been checked and these folks will have an opportunity beyond just the property owner's desire to keep them in the loop, there's the notice requirement and no one will be removed from their unit at any time. i'm here if you have any questions and thank you. >> does that include that they won't be -- if they have a parking mace beeparking place, s placed from their storage unit or have the loss of use of the laundry and drying facilities? >> the cities position at this point is that for an adu project, you can't simply remove them, so to the degree that any space needs to be used, other accommodations will be provided during that temporary move.
>> is there a reason we didn't receive some plans so we wouldn't be going through this hearing with blinders on? >> yes, apology for that. it was a jurisdiction request and, frankly, the time for the response comes relatively quickly on this one and i figured the issues were relatively limited but i'm hearing the entire board's entire to see that regardless of the scope and the matter. so i'll take that into consideration moving forward. >> in the to criticize you, but it's for the public record and it dovetails on a few things we've been working on here. one of the issues we're wrestling with is the justifiable fear factor that tenants have with regard to apartment building owners and some of whom are choosing to add adus. some of whom have to go through the retrofit process by virtue
of the law, and at this point, especially with the adu situation, there is to requirement in our opinion and we've gone on the record and sent a letter to the board of supervisors that there is no notice whatsoever, which if you happen to be an apartment dweller lucky enough to have an apartment in san francisco you can afford, when you hear that your building might be going under some surgery, that might displace you or not. they don't know because there's no notice. and so, that's why you're going to find some sensitivity. i'm using you as an opportunity to speak on the subject and that's why you find some sensitivity from this panel until the board of supervisors resolves the issue and then in our view gives proper notice of the tenants. that's why we would like plans and transparency and clarity.
>> my concern, unlike the other case, that these people reached out to management and to me, they outright lied to them. if they have permits in hand, how could they say this is in the planning works? the thought is that granted the opener is the othe other other e building and if you impact in any way it's common courtesy you inform the tenant prior and make it easier for everyone. according to the breach, and unfortunately, you did not submit one. it said they called numerous times prior to these permits, even after the permits were earneissued. permits indicate it's not in the preplanning face. phase.
phase. from the site permit doesn't authorize construction and we're going through the adenda process and it's being pursued. there's been no right to date to start construction. as you know, this is an owner that owns a number of buildings in the city and a lot of these projects are teeing them up at various stages. we weren't there and i'm not saying i was. i look at that email exchange and the requester's packet and i see reasonable back and forth and when this was brought up. >> i get it, but verito serious se is thelargest landlord in san francisco and so with many practicing and having many permits out, this should not be a surprise. they should probably have an expediter sitting inside at dbi.
so i'm trying to figure out where the mystery came from here. >> what i will say, this adu issue has been coming up a lot outside of the context of this board, specifically with respect to parking spaces. what i will tell you, commissioner, is that it's very much a work in progress and this is something i will communicate back to them because i, too, thini don'tthink it's a bad idet least give a heads up saying we're processing this permit. we don't know if we'll do it this year or next year. i'm just pointing out they're one of the largest adu providers in san francisco that they should have a system town. >> down.
>> i think absolutely right and i think that's a lesson. >> mr. sanchez, we will now hear from the planning department. >> thank you. subject property at so 64 deloris is located within rn1 zoning district, a mixed residential density district seeking to add two adus to the subject property increasing the count from 12 to 4 units. from the permit, it is soft story and a separate permit to bring it under compliance was issued in october of 2018. the subject permit was submitted in december of 2016, was approved abouapproved in 2017 an 2018 and the issuance would have the i 15-day appeal period. there's to accessory dwelling units and there is more recently as of last summer a courtesy
notice that we ask the property owners to do, if there will be a reduction in services. however, this permit, given it was reviewed by planning in december of 2017, that predates the courtesy notice which became effective last summer. so it would not be subject to that. from my understanding, they are reducing the number of parking spaces from ten to five and that is all that i have to note on this and just reiterating that there's to notice under the appling code and it couldn't have been subject to the courtesy notice we implemented last summer. >> so what bothers me and please clarify for the public, a side permit was issued but there were no plans and that would come as
an adenda will that be subject to an asunny. >> no. >> right. and this is a problem. if you were a tenant in an apartment, i can believe the rhetoric from the apartment building as much as i want to, but i'm still living in limbo and in fear because there are no plans. so all is well and food approximately we'lgood.and it dy and part of an adenda and not appealable or noticeable and stuff happens. so this is really problematic. this is really probbati problem.
they're a large landowner, well well-respected but do you know there are others who are not quite so respected and who may operate in a different way? so this is scarry. if i'm sitting with the appellant right now, i would be scared for the appellant because they're flying blind. they have to ability to appeal once these -- the real permit is issue. the site permit could be considered smoke and mirrors because there's to plans associatessed witassociated wit. >> the site permit is important. you'll find that anyone -- there are nuances to the permitting process for sure, but i was surprised to hear the attorney for the property owner say, well, it just a site permit. a site permit is a critical element and it is the appealable
document. there are plans associated with this. it's received all of the planning approvals that are necessary. if there were communications with tenant and asked is there a permit, i don't think they should be required to say, well, was it just a site permit or an adenda. they do have a permit and they have the site permit that was issued in september. whether or not there have been plan, there have been plans since december of 2016. they were reviewed b for a yeary the planning department. i think there could have been for transparency and could have been referred to the city's website which has this information about the permit processing. i think the information that was given wasn't as transparent and clear and complete as it could have been by the management. sitting in a different meeting right now, i think i heard that
the counsel for the project sponsor said there are no plans and they're still in flux. >> there are plans and we approve them. >> but the final construction plans. >> they don't have the ability to construct until they get the appropriate adenda which are the final details, but once you have your site permit, you know everything you need to know and that's the most useful information for the tenants. i don't know the tenants will care about the details that dbi is reviewing under the adenda and the fine details of electrical or mechanical or plumbing. they'll care about how many parking spaces are removed and how many units are added. that is well known and approved in 2017. >> should we be worried for the tenants when they reached out and got the feedback from the project sponsors' representative that said, well, the apple plane
still in flux? i thought that i read that? >> there could be changes. i would be concer concerned sayg we've received plans to do x, we may change that and do y maybe maybe they'll want to do more units. they have the ability to come back but they would need a revision to the site permit. if they wanted to come in and add another unit, they would need a revision and they can't do that under the adenda. i mean, they may be in flux but there could are been more communication about what was already approved. >> makes me feel better constituent out a letter that we did to the board of supervisors because i'm still, you know, wondering if i'm having gauze put over my eyes because i can't
get full disclosure and i don't know when something is permitted or applied for and i can't see plans. a lot of ambiguity that makes me feel uncomfortable, but that's why we sent a letter to the board of supervisors. >> the information is publically available. if they had gone to our website, net would have been able to see that information. if they asked the property opener and told we don't have plans. mr. mr. sanchez, is there a reason why it started three yeas ago? >> it was less than two years. >> since 12/22/2016, so two and a half years. >> they were submitted in 2016, approved by planning a year later and then knife months after that, it was issued. so it was less than two years.
>> date filed 12/22/2016 and issued september 21, 2018. is that the turn-around time for a du? >> our review was about a year and we have a more stream-lined process. this is on the earlier end of the adus. >> i wasn't trying to play pin the tail but that's why it took so long. >> it was an earlier adu submittal. >> thank you. >> i would like to add at this point, while i understand your perspective, and i think i said to two weeks ago discussing sending the letter, the issues that are of concern to the ten tenants that won't come to this board anyway. we're not solving for a problem that will change anything here. if they have issues with the permit, that's a different subject, but if they're worried about severance of services,
that's not our jurisdiction. i just want to clarify that. >> understood and recognised. >> thank you. we will now hear if the department of building inspection. >> the fees were or by $20,300 and i don't see anything untoward of the permit, seems to be properly done and no noticing permit. we issue 60,000 permits a year and there's a small number that people get notified on, neighbors, and so, there isn't anything wrong with the notification process that dbi on
this type of permit and one thing i would warn against is the adenda process, sometimes on projects we have up to is a adenta and you wouldn't want an appeal on every adenda. the site permit, i agree with mr. sanchez, there is a lot of information on that site permit and that doesn't going to change much regarding the lay-out of these units. if you look at the site permit plans, you won't see a lot of changes. if there was, the dbi process would send that back to planning just as we do with additions of new buildings. in essence, this is a good process because it now let's them design it structurally for what they got out of appling, basically. we've talked about this before. there was a soft-story permit and on the building itself, they
part of this is about this is a permitting question and whether they should be given access to the appeal's process to point made earlier about how invasive this project is going to be, whether tenants will be temporarily displaced, for example, whether it meets the criteria outlined by the dbi, this project is scheduled to take eight to nine months. now if that's daily, eight to nine months and goes with the loss of services, even if temporary that have been outlined, water turn-offs, electricity turn-offs, i think the tenants of our billion ought tbuildingought to have the abilo make an appeal. these adu projects seem to fit in an odd space considering how long and invasive they can be.
just to answer a question that was brought up previously, i originally sent the email to kelly dixon, who was a regional manager in charge of our building for green tree property management. it was dated 2/14/2019. to start a conversation about the soft story retrofit, because that's the first thing i heard and we knew that green tree/veritose had a requirement to do the retrofit this year. and then in april, april 17th, 2019, just to make clear we've been talking about plans and so on, just wanted to read a little bit of this email. as plans po plans have not been finalized, i do not have details
but the project has been estimated eight to nine month and then we bring up the conversation about being compensated for lost parking spaces, even if temporarily and she says as for the compensation plan for parking, it would be dependent on the residential lease and parking charges. i'm unable to give global answer which made us believe we would have go lease by lease and hope that we get compensated. it looks good. so i have a question, sir. so you understand there was no notification required going through here, so he were not obliged by city to inform and neither was the department. but you're pretty informed that you've gone through and did you ever look at the city and county's website to the plans on file? >> i did not. i did not look -- it's not common practice.
>> you've not a little more awargotten a little moreaware. >> i looked at the dbi's website but i don't track it to see when new permits were issue. so i didn't see the. >> when were you aware there would be work done to the property, period? >> there were two projected floatinprojectsfloating around. there's a soft-story retrofit that we knew would happen but we didn't know when and the adus which we suspected because i have seen people outback doing the measurement, eyeing the place and they offered to pay us for parking spaces in the past. >> that's the bonus that required soft story and they're allowed to fit in as many as they can, so a parking spot is
golden yourself. itself. >> but when did we know, this was our idea and wasn't until the email dated -- the one i just read from, april 17, that the opening line, i want to let you know we're moving forward with plans for the soft story and possibly the ad us. >> how long have you been a tenant in this building? >> since 2010. >> they started this work this 2016 but did not inform you until april of 2019? >> april 2019, after i reached out to them in february of 2019. ok, thank you. >> so how did you become originally aware of the plans? was it seeing from people around. you said you knew they had to do the mandatory size and retrofit? did they inform you?
>> i don't know specifically how i came to know that the soft story retrofit had to be done, i think, by september of this year. i mean, we all talk and know this is probably coming. my memory is one of the other ten quanttenants in the buildine jacob whose been there 39 years. he's keen to know what's going on and i want to say he brought it to my attention that the law would require them to do this work by september. >> ok, thank you. >> thank you. so commission es commissioners,s submitted. >> so since there was a reference to a decision that was made in january, which could be seen as a precedent, i would like to ask the city attorney if he has any advice on whether to rely on that as a precedent? >> as know, the board's decisions are not residential. .
this did not involve a soft-story retrofit or adu. i think in that case, the tenant would be required to leave the apartment in connection with the work. irrespective of those two differences, the board can take jurisdiction of a case where the city has intentionally or inadvertently caused the appellant to be late in filing the case. and i would caution the board that there has to be a city officer who has a duty to provide such notification under existing law for there to be a finding the city intentionally caused the late filing. the board is not a legislative body and it is up to the board of supervisors to man make poliy
decisions for the city. by finding the city should create a new requirement, it could be argued that the board would be stepping outside of its boundaries, its jurisdiction and imposing a requirement that is not existings in the current law. >> now, in a jurisdictional case, do we have the ability to continue to require more information so that i can make a decision? or do we have to make a decision today? >> the board can continue this case just like it could continue any other case. i want to add, this permit is not suspended. >> the board could still go forward. just whether we will take jurisdiction or not. >> ok, thank you. >> i think i would offer i would offer to commissioner lazareth's point to the jurisdiction and the name of our body and follow up on the attorney's
recommendation and kind of counsel to us, that what is in consideration here doesn't seem to actually be the building permit itself or the site permit as it were. but rather the potential loss of services which we talk about often as part of the circumstancjurisdiction of the d if a tenant has a case or issue regarding losing services and not properly compensated with the city's code and ordinance and things like that. so while i am very sympathetic to the situation, i'm open to getting more information and i'm not sure this would qualify as a case that we would extent our er jurisdiction to cover, especially considering the subject does not really appear to be some the construction. whereas i think -- not that it's precedent-sitting but there was impact to the unit that the appellant was dwelling in through the construction itself. that was a little bit, i think,
more troubling, perhaps. >> i would agree with both commissioner tanner and commissioner lazy renta lazarete should be mindful of what we're chatting about here. and we have heard many cases and some are more hairy than others. this is not one of the hairier ones. hairy would be when there were other activity going on in the building as part of the permit, that would cause move-outs. we've had situations where, a lot of situations and not to get into. but i would agree this is a
rent-board issue, not a permit issue. that being said, it would be one heck of a lot easier, however, as i get back on my bully pulpit, for the board of supervisors to provide notice in situations like this, because we wouldn't be here in the first place. we might not be here in the first place. mr. sanchez is shaking his head. because if there were notice, if there was the requirement for a building owner to disclose, this is what we're doing. thihere are the plans. this is how you'll be affect and you won't be affected, there might be an opportunity to have clarification between the building owner and tenant. without that, everything is fuzzy manual.
math but all tenants are not as sophisticated as you would like them to be. and they all might -- you see week after week how people get up in front of us and say we've never been here before and we have to idea how this system works, and so we have to fall to the lowest common denominator. again, i would be an advocate of notice, it's not a requirement right now an and not the law. it might be easier if there was better disclosure and a tendency to side-step ambiguity. with that, i'll acts fo acts foa motion. >> let me add my two cents first. so as a landlord and as a citizen of this city, i think that personally, i think landlords should be more considerate of the people that
are living near spaces in their. it's not our job to make legislation. that's the board of supervisors and we pointed in that direction. i don't know what happened here, owother than what's before us. sad to see a landlord have a stumble like this but even by continuing this, there's nothing we have no real jurisdiction of what you guys real want to see happen here and so, again, i feel bad, but i think that in this particular case, i'm not willing to take jurisdiction. >> i would like to make one other distinction which is regardless of what is appropriately here, this is a jurisdiction request and we could fall back on the issue as inadvertently and to me that's
patently clear. >> yes. >> no disagreement. >> who would like to make that motion? >> i move to deny the jurisdiction request on the basis of the city neither intentionally or inadvertently, causing the request to be late. >> on commissione the motion? so that motion carries 4-0 and the request is denied. >> and there's no further business tonight so we are adjourned. >> just to the appellants, you could probably talk to the staff from the city departments and true little add a block notification or something to indicate when permits are pulled that you'll be notified.
[♪] >> coming to san francisco on june 11th, the earthquake safety his fair from 10:00 a.m. until 4:00 p.m. as the auditorium at 99 grove street. meet with contractors, design professionals professionals, engineers and architects, along with city agencies and hundreds of booths on the main floor. attend one of the workshops at 11:00 a.m. the seismic safety strategies
study. what you need to know is the city strengthens buildings 240 feet high and higher, and to get ready to the next -- for the next big one. 12:00 p.m., changes in the updated citywide vacant commercial storefront ordinance. 1:00 p.m., comply with the accessible business entrance program to enable everyone to enter your business. 2:00 p.m., home modelling process made stress-free, meet the experts and understand the permit review issuance and inspections process. 3:00 p.m., making the best use of the accessory dwelling unit and legalization program to at affordable housing. learn from these three workshops at the june 11th d.b.i. earthquake safety fair, and begin to get ready for the big one by taking immediate steps to protect both family and property we hope to see you there, so register now. [♪]
>> my name tom hewitt. first of all, i would like to welcome everyone to come to this fair. this safety fair, we trying to educate the public regarding how to prepare themselves during and after the earthquake and then to protect themselves for next 72 hours. >> hi. my name's ed sweeney. i'm the director of services at department of building inspection, and we put together a great fair for the city of san francisco to come down and meet all the experts. we've got engineers, architects. we have builders, we have government agencies. >> well, we have four specific workshops.
we have the accessible business entrance. >> my name is leah, and i am the assistant manager with the department of small business. i am leading the new accessibility ordinance that helps existing owners better comply with existing access laws. so all buildings that have places of public accommodation in san francisco, they must comply with this ordinance. >> the a.d.e. was setup by the board of supervisors, and the ordinance was passed about a year ago. >> one of the biggest updates that we have is that the deadlines were extended, so all of the deadlines were extended by six months. >> and it's really to help the public, the business community to be specific, to cut down on the amount of drive by lawsuits. >> so on this workshop, we're
going to be covering what the compliance looks like, what business examiand property owne need to know how to comply with the ordinance. we'll also talk about the departments that are involved, including the office of small business, department of building inspection, planning department, as well as the mayor's office on disability. >> hi. i'm marselle, and i manage a team at the building department. today, we'll cover the meaning of a.d.u.s, more commonly known as accessory dwelling units. we'll talk about the code and permitting processes, and we'll also talk about legalizing existing dwelling units that are currently unwarranted. >> this is the department of building inspection's
residential remodelling workshop. my name is senior electrical inspector cheryl rose, and at this workshop, we're going to be answering questions such as do i need an electrical permit when i'm upgrading my dwelling, when do i need to have planning involved in a residential remodel, and what's involved with the coerce process? we're going to also be reviewing inspection process, and the permitting process for residential remodel in san francisco. there's always questions that need answers. it's a mystery to the general public what goes on in construction, and the more we can clarify the process, the more involved the consumer can be and feel comfortable with the contractors they're working with and the product they're getting in the results. if you have questions that aren't addressed in this workshop, you're always welcome to come up to the third floor of
1660 mission street, and we're happy to discuss it with you and find out what you need to do. >> the program is very successful. the last piece is already 60% in compliance. >> well, we have a very important day coming up. it's sept 15. last four has to be compliance, which means that the level four people that have to register with us and give us a basic indication of how they're going to deal with their seismic issues on their building. >> i'm francis zamora, and i'm with the san francisco department of emergency management, and today we talked about how to prepare for emergencies in san francisco. and so that's really importantiimportant. in san francisco, it's no secret. we live in earthquake country.
there's a big chance we will be involved in a major earthquake in the next 30 years, but we don't have to be afraid. these are going to be your first responders outside of the police officers, paramedics, first responders, these are going to be the people that come to your aid first. by getting to know your neighbors, you're going to know who needs help and who can help in case of an emergency. one of the great ways to do that is for signing7for nert, san francisco neighborhood emergency response team. it teaches you how to take care of yourself, your loved ones, and your neighborhood in the case of an emergency. information is just as important as water and food in an emergency. san francisco has an emergency text message alert system, called text sf. if there's some kind of an emergency happening in san francisco or your neighborhood, it could be a police action, a big fire, a tsunami or an
earthquake. all you have to do is text your citizenship code to 888777, and your mobile phone is automatically registered for alert sf. >> my name is fernando juarez, and i'm a fire captain with the san francisco fire department. we have a hire extinguisher training system. you want to pull the pin, stand at least 8 feet away, aim it at the base. if you're too close, the conical laser that comes out, it's too small, and the fire won't go out on the screen. if you step back, the conical shape on the screen is bigger, and it will take the fire go out faster. so it can tell when you're too
close. >> my name is alicia wu, and i'm the director of a san francisco based nonprofit. since 2015, we go out to the public, to the community and provide training in different topics. today we're doing c.p.r., controlling external feeding and how to do perfect communications in each topic, and also, i hope that they can bring it home and start gathering all the supplies for themselves to. >> on any given day in san francisco, we're very well resourced in terms of public safety professionals, but we all know in the event of a large scale disaster, it will be hours and days before the public safety professionals can get to you, so we encourage people to have that plan in place, be
proactive. there's websites. we have a wonderful website called 72hours.org. it tells you how to prepare yourself, your family, your pets, your home, your workplace. we can't emphasize enough how important it is to be shop and dine in the 49 promotes local businesses and challenges residents to do their shopping and dining within the 49 square miles of san francisco. by supporting local services within our neighborhoods, we help san francisco remain unique, successful, and vibrant. so where will you shop and dine in the 49? >> my name is ray behr. i am the owner of chief plus. it's a destination specialty
foods store, and it's also a corner grocery store, as well. we call it cheese plus because there's a lot of additions in addition to cheese here. from fresh flowers, to wine, past a, chocolate, our dining area and espresso bar. you can have a casual meeting if you want to. it's a real community gathering place. what makes little polk unique, i think, first of all, it's a great pedestrian street. there's people out and about all day, meeting this neighbor and coming out and supporting the businesses. the businesses here are almost all exclusively independent owned small businesses. it harkens back to supporting local. polk street doesn't look like anywhere u.s.a. it has its own businesses and
personality. we have clothing stores to gallerys, to personal service stores, where you can get your hsus repaired, luggage repaired. there's a music studio across the street. it's raily a diverse and unique offering on this really great street. i think san franciscans should shop local as much as they can because they can discover things that they may not be familiar with. again, the marketplace is changing, and, you know, you look at a screen, and you click a mouse, and you order something, and it shows up, but to have a tangible experience, to be able to come in to taste things, to see things, to smell things, all those things, it's very important that you do so.
>> good morning, everyone. welcome to the may 20th, 2019 meeting of the rules committee. i am chair of the committee. seated to my right is our vice chair, supervisor walton. seated to my left is rules committee members supervisor gordon moore, and we are joined by supervisor rafael nadal him and today -- supervisor mandelman today. i would like to thank san francisco government t.v. for staffing this meeting. mr. clark, do you have any announcements? >> sans all cell phones and electronic devices. copies of any documents to be