December 2007 Page 0 · I. Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities and Threats (SWOT) Analysis 105 II....
Transcript of December 2007 Page 0 · I. Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities and Threats (SWOT) Analysis 105 II....
December 2007 Page 0
December 2007 Page 1
TABLE OF CONTENTS
DIRECTOR’S MESSAGE 3
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 5
I. Plan Review and Permit Issuance Subcommittee 6
II. Inspections Subcommittee 7
III. Automation Subcommittee 8
IV. Performance Measures Subcommittee 8
REPORT METHODOLOGY 11
SUBCOMMITTEE REPORTS 13
Plan Review and Permit Issuance Subcommittee 14
I. Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities and Threats (SWOT) Analysis 15
II. Analysis of Benchmarking Survey and Stakeholder Survey 17
III. Plan Review and Permit Issuance Subcommittee Recommendations 20
a. Plan Review and Permit Issuance: Overall Process 20
b. Department of Building Inspection: Permit Center 22
c. Planning Department 23
d. Department of Public Works – Bureau of Street Use and Mapping 25
e. Department of Public Health 25
f. Redevelopment Agency 26
g. Mayor’s Office on Disability 26
h. San Francisco Fire Department 26
i. San Francisco Public Utilities Commission 26
j. General Recommendations 26
IV. Mapping 28
Inspection Subcommittee Report 69
I. Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities and Threats (SWOT) Analysis 70
II. Analysis of Benchmarking Survey and Stakeholder Survey 75
III. Inspections Subcommittee Recommendations 77
a. Inspections: Overall Process 77
December 2007 Page 2
b. Inspections: Policy Issues 78
c. San Francisco Fire Department 79
d. City Inspection Vehicles 80
e. Task Forces 80
IV. Mapping 81
Automation Subcommittee Report 104
I. Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities and Threats (SWOT) Analysis 105
II. Analysis of Benchmarking Survey and Stakeholder Survey 108
III. Automation Findings 111
IV. Automation Subcommittee Recommendations 114
a. Integrated Permit Tracking System 114
b. Implement Automatic Customer Tracking System 114
c. Online Services 114
d. Automate Plan Review Services 115
e. Automate Inspection Services 115
f. Document Management System 116
V. Mapping 117
Performance Measures Subcommittee Report 134
APPENDIX 137
Benchmarking Surveys 138
Stakeholder Surveys 171
Parking Lot Issues 208
Participants 210
Photographs 218
December 2007 Page 3
BUSINESS PROCESS REENGINEERING FOR THE BUILDING DEVELOPMENT REVIEW AND INSPECTION PROCESS IN SAN FRANCISCO
Business Process Reengineering (BPR) is a long established management analytical tool used to effect substantial improvements in large organizations with complex processes. It is a fundamental rethinking and radical redesign of business processes with the goal of achieving dramatic improvements in quality, timeliness and responsiveness in the delivery of services. In May 2007, the San Francisco Department of Building Inspection (DBI), under the direction of Mayor Gavin Newsom and the Building Inspection Commission (BIC), embarked on an ambitious Business Process Reengineering initiative to examine the entire building development review, inspection and permitting process for the City and County of San Francisco. The primary goal was to analyze the existing permitting and inspection process city wide, understand its strengths and weaknesses, and then design a new process that will result in a streamlined, efficient process with a focus on delivering high quality and timely services to our citizens. In June 2007, we invited key decision makers from the Mayor’s Office, city departments, and stakeholders from the public to convene as our BPR Executive Steering Committee. Four subcommittees were then formed: Plan Review and Permit Issuance; Inspections; Automation; and Performance Measures. Each subcommittee included staff representing city Departments involved in the review and inspection of developments, city union representatives, as well as representatives from industry, community organizations and individual customers. These subcommittees met on a weekly basis (and sometimes more frequently) for four months. During this period, several subcommittee members visited other cities, including San Diego, Sacramento, San Jose and Seattle to review their development review processes and compare those to current practices in San Francisco. As you will see in the information provided in this report, each subcommittee went through an in-depth, detailed analysis of existing processes; identified key findings; and developed a series of specific recommendations that provide San Francisco’s departments involved in the permit review and inspection process with an excellent “roadmap” to achieve major improvements in the way we do our work. The focus throughout the BPR process remained on implementing changes intended to achieve a simpler, easier-to-navigate, permit process that improves turnaround times, ensures predictability in the process and provides accurate, consistent, and timely service with an emphasis on excellence in customer service. As a result of the BPR process, a strong foundation and roadmap have been established to guide the implementation process. The recommendations will be prioritized for implementation along with stipulated staffing and budgeting requirements over the next 12 - 24 months. Cooperation and support by the Mayor’s Office, the Board of Supervisors, city departments and their respective Commissions will be essential to the success of this effort. Continued monitoring of the implementation of these improvements will enable us to maximize efficiencies and ensure substantial improvements in customer service. Simultaneously with the BPR effort, the Department contracted with an independent, professional research company – Corey, Canapary & Galanis Research, in late July and in
December 2007 Page 4
August, to conduct three focus groups to elicit qualitative insights about the Department’s review and approval process from our customers. These focus groups represented a cross-section of the Department’s customers – specifically homeowners, building professionals and community and industry representatives – and provided us with additional current data related to public and customer service perceptions. Although we did not include the findings from these focus groups in the deliberations of the BPR subcommittees due to time constraints, the focus groups give us another verifiable source of research that substantiates many of the BPR recommendations. As we move forward with the Implementation Phase, the Department will utilize the insightful information produced from the focus groups’ research to ensure that we attain one of our primary goals: being aware of and responding effectively to the needs of our customers. I am proud to point out that a major finding of our BPR effort is that the staff at DBI, as well as other city agencies, are highly professional, very competent, and possess a great deal of talent, experience and expertise. The staff is hard working, highly motivated, creative, and committed to providing high quality and timely service to our citizens. We have completed this important BPR report, thanks to the dedicated and thoughtful efforts of the nearly 200 participants listed in the appendix. I especially want to thank the DBI staff who graciously agreed to take on the additional responsibility of chairing and facilitating the BPR initiative, as well as those who participated on the subcommittees. Special thanks also go to our industry subcommittee co-chairs, John Schlesinger from the American Institute of Architects, who led the Plan Review and Permit Issuance Subcommittee; John O’Connor of the Residential Builders Association, who co-chaired the Inspection Subcommittee; Tony Sanchez-Corea of A.R. Sanchez-Corea & Associates, Inc., who co-chaired the Automation Subcommittee; and Gabriel Metcalf, Executive Director of San Francisco Planning + Urban Research Association, who co-chaired the Performance Measures Subcommittee. I also want to thank our customers, representatives of industry and community groups, and other city department staff who took time from their busy schedules to assist us in this invaluable endeavor.
Isam Hasenin, P.E., C.B.O. Director Department of Building Inspection
December 2007 Page 5
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
December 2007 Page 6
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The BPR Executive Steering Committee completed its review of recommendations forwarded by its four subcommittees in late October 2007. Over 180 recommendations were approved for inclusion in this Report. In addition to these key recommendations, “parking lot” issues were identified by the subcommittees, noting that these were outside of the scope of this initiative.
HIGHLIGHTS OF DBI BPR KEY FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
I. PLAN REVIEW AND PERMIT ISSUANCE SUBCOMMITTEE
This subcommittee examined the complex review and permit issuance process involving multiple city departments. Depending upon the scope of a proposed project, reviews often demand the time and resources of the Department of Building Inspection, the Planning Department, the Department of Public Works, the San Francisco Fire Department, the Department of Public Health, the Mayor’s Office on Disabilities, the Redevelopment Agency, the San Francisco Public Utilities Commission, the Municipal Transportation Authority, and others. The subcommittee mapped in detail the “As-Is” and “To-Be” process involved in real project scenarios – and identified the following Key Findings and Recommendations:
Key Findings:
• Automation and technology are not available and/or not fully utilized. • Lack of well-defined turnaround time for project review. • Unreasonably long review and processing times. • Inconsistent plan submittal standards and requirements that vary among reviewing
agencies. • Duplication of plan reviews and rechecks by different reviewing agencies. • Lack of adequate quality control, staff training manuals and operating procedures. • Inconsistent application of rules and regulations. • Inconsistent method of tracking customers in the building. • Frequent breakdowns in permitting process for customers. • Improper and inconsistent use of the Permit Tracking System. • Complex bureaucratic process that still relies too heavily on paper. • Too many loop-backs in the permitting process. • Unnecessary hand-offs of customers in the review and processing of permits. • Frequent bottlenecks at customer service stations. • Overlapping and sometimes conflicting requirements from different divisions and/or
agencies. • Poor coordination among divisions resulting in a bureaucratic “silo” mentality.
December 2007 Page 7
Key Recommendations:
• Create new permit technician classification, and/or retrain those in existing classification to obtain skills to streamline the review process.
• Implement parallel plan check process for all projects. • Improve inter-agency and intra-agency coordination of reviews and
communications. • Develop, publish, and implement plan review turnaround times. • Expand Over-The-Counter services and reviews. • Install an automated customer tracking system in the Permit Center. • Centralize intake/plan submittal process and develop better intake standards. • Identify/eliminate redundant, unnecessary reviews, approvals, and regulations. • Create/Remodel Permit Center to improve the customer’s experience. • Create a true “One-Stop Shop,” to include all city review agencies. • Reduce paper-based process and maximize the use of automation and
technology. • Expand web-based services.
II. INSPECTIONS SUBCOMMITTEE
Because multiple city departments and agencies are frequently involved in a wide range of inspections, coordination issues and time-consuming duplications were identified as areas in need of change. The subcommittee examined carefully the “As-Is” and “To-Be” review and approval process and steps involved in inspection services, and made the following Key Findings and Recommendations:
Key Findings:
• Lengthy turnaround times for inspections. • Duplication of inspections by more than one agency. • Automation and technology are not available and/or not fully utilized. • Automation and technology are not consistently used across all disciplines. • Inconsistent procedures for inspection requests between different disciplines.
Key Recommendations:
• Develop, publish, and implement turnaround times for inspections to be within two
business days of request, with a later goal of one business day. • Eliminate duplicate inspections by defining explicit inspection responsibilities for
each agency and agency divisions. • Improve coordination between DBI inspections and other agencies such as PG&E,
Water Department, SFPUC, DPW-BSM, DPH, etc. • Centralize and automate inspection scheduling for all disciplines, with all city
agencies to adhere to uniform time, hours and methods of inspections. • Improve consistency and uniformity between inspection staff and/or agencies. • Schedule Board of Permit Appeals cases to be heard within 45 calendar days to
expedite inspections’ process.
December 2007 Page 8
III. AUTOMATION SUBCOMMITTEE
This subcommittee focused on the identification and application of state-of-the-art and appropriate technologies, including areas where more accessible and more convenient web-based/online services can be provided, and communications with customers can be improved. It examined in detail the permit review and inspections’ process steps where automation and/or new technology tools can make substantial improvements in terms of accuracy and consistency of data collection, and provide the systemic means to improve the process for those using the system both within city government and the public. The subcommittee identified the following Key Findings and Recommendations:
Key Findings:
• Databases of agencies involved in permit reviews and inspections are not linked. • Lack of an automated system to track customers in the Permit Center. • Inconsistent use of the Permit Tracking System by staff. • Inability of the current Permit Tracking System to provide holds, and accountability
sign-offs. • Inability of the current Permit Tracking System to provide accurate information that
shows online/real-time status of any project, including identifying which staff person within a specific agency is currently reviewing that project.
• Too much reliance on paper forms, permits, etc. • Lack of online plan review and limited online permitting processes. • Lack of automated transfer of inspection information between field sites and the
administrative office.
Key Recommendations:
• Develop city-wide automated permit tracking system to track the entire development, review, permit, and inspection process.
• Integrate databases from all departments involved in permit review and inspections. • Create a “smart” permit numbering system for simplified, more accurate, tracking of
projects. • Provide updated online services covering all pertinent information for any property,
its permit history, construction type, complaints, violations, conditions of approval, etc.
• Expand the availability, use, and scope of online permits. • Provide field staff with mobile device capable of receiving/transmitting/updating
information between the field and office database. • Pilot electronic plan submittal and plan review. • Implement an automated customer tracking system in the Permit Center.
IV. PERFORMANCE MEASURES SUBCOMMITEE
This subcommittee focused on the identification and development of quantifiable and measurable criteria applicable to all city agencies involved in the application and plan review, permit issuance and inspection processes. Charged with setting reasonable, practical and achievable goals/performance standards city wide, and
December 2007 Page 9
thereby setting the baseline from which ongoing changes may be measured and acted upon, the subcommittee identified the following Key Findings and Recommendations:
Key Findings:
• Lack of established turnaround time targets for plan reviews. • Lack of established turnaround time targets for inspections.
Key Recommendations:
• Implement the following performance measures and turnaround times. • Provide quarterly and annual reports to evaluate actual performance against
established measures and objectives.
Target:
1. To complete and issue to the project sponsor the initial comprehensive plan review comments within established turnaround times as described below, for at least 90% of projects. These turnaround times will apply to all review disciplines unless otherwise noted.
a. Small Projects: 10 business days from arrival date to review discipline.
• Simple one or two-story single family and duplex on level lot. • Minor modifications and additions to single multi-family residential,
commercial and industrial buildings. • Signs with structural calculations. • Commercial tenant-improvements with minor structural calculations. • Site retaining walls. • Foundation repairs. • Storage racks.
b. Medium Projects: 20 business days from arrival date to review discipline.
• Three-story or more single family dwelling or duplex. • Custom, unusual single family dwelling including hillside with steel
substructure and/or concrete piers or caissons. • Two, three or four-story multi-family, commercial or office buildings. • Simple four-story multi-family residential project over a concrete podium. • Complex commercial and office tenant improvements with or without
structural calculations. • Parking structures (up to three stories). • Assembly occupancies (churches, schools, restaurants with multiple dining
rooms, etc.). • Excavation and shoring. • Indoor swimming pool.
December 2007 Page 10
c. Large Projects: Turnaround times to be determined on a case by case basis determined and provided to project sponsor at submittal time for all reviewing agencies (excluding Planning Department and SFRA). Note: These projects must go through completeness review by appointment only before intake.
• Complex four or more stories commercial/office buildings or multi-family
project including buildings over a concrete podium. • High rise buildings. • Multiplex theatres/auditoriums. • Multi-story shopping centers/malls. • Convention centers. • Airport. • Wastewater and water treatment plants. • Projects subject to peer review.
2. For building permit application, Planning Department and SFRA to complete
and issue the initial comprehensive plan review comments/corrections, within 15 business days of arrival date, for 90% of projects.
3. To schedule all rechecks within three business days of request for at least 90%
of projects.
4. To distribute all submitted drawings to next review station within one business day for 90% of projects.
5. To schedule pre-application meetings for all city agencies, excluding Planning
Department and SFRA, within three business days of request and to be held within 10 business days for 90% of projects.
6. For Planning Department and SFRA, to schedule pre-application meetings
within three business days of request to be held within 15 business days for 90% of projects.
7. For all city agencies, to perform field inspections associated with DBI permits
within two business days of request for 90% of projects with a long-term goal of one business day.
8. For DBI and SFFD, to respond to life hazards/life safety/lack of heat
complaints within one business day for 100% of requests.
December 2007 Page 11
REPORT METHODOLOGY
December 2007 Page 12
REPORT METHODOLOGY To provide a framework of review and actions, each of San Francisco’s BPR subcommittees applied the following key principles to business process reengineering. These were:
• “SWOT” is an acronym for the identification of the Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities and Threats impacting an organization. The BPR subcommittees conducted a SWOT analysis which enabled them to make accurate and focused strategic decisions and to prioritize reengineering steps.
• Gather and analyze existing data to get a clear understanding of how the work
processes currently operate within the city, as well as collect information from other agencies. The BPR subcommittees for Plan Review and Permit Issuance, Inspections, Automation, and Performance Measures developed data questionnaires pertaining to their respective areas of expertise and requested data input from 31 jurisdictions for benchmarking purposes, as well as obtained stakeholders’ qualitative reviews of the existing process to assist in identifying process areas of key customer concern.
• Create Process Flow Mapping – a tool that visually displays an entire process in a
logical sequence of events from beginning to end. Subcommittees produced both “As-Is” and “To-Be” process maps – which may be seen in the “Mapping” section of this Report. These maps provide a structure for thinking through an often complex process in a simplified manner, which can then be analyzed. Process Flow Mapping enabled the subcommittee participants to ask questions about the process such as:
• Why? • What happens if …? • Do we have to …? • What is the consequence of not doing…? • What does this mean? • How did that get started? • What is the purpose for that? • What is the value-added? (Steps that are relevant/contribute to effectiveness) • What is the non-value added? (Bottlenecks, barriers, breakdowns, etc.)
• Recommendations – As a result of the detailed analysis of existing processes;
“As-Is” and “To-Be” Process Flow Mapping, a series of specific recommendations were developed that provide San Francisco’s departments involved in the permit review and inspection processes with an excellent “roadmap” to achieve major improvements in the way we do our work.
December 2007 Page 13
SUBCOMMITTEE REPORTS
December 2007 Page 14
PLAN REVIEW AND
PERMIT ISSUANCE SUBCOMMITTEE REPORT
December 2007 Page 15
PLAN REVIEW AND PERMIT ISSUANCE SUBCOMMITTEE
The Plan Review and Permit Issuance Subcommittee analyzed how all city agencies currently review building permit applications, methods used for permit tracking and issuance, and which practices should be changed to improve these processes. This was done by detailed mapping of both the “As-Is” and “To-Be” process. More than 120 recommendations are included in this report to meet the goals of better utilizing the professional expertise of city staff, streamlining the processes within city agencies and vastly improving customer service.
I. SWOT ANALYSIS
During the SWOT Analysis meetings, the subcommittee found the strongest elements of the permit process in San Francisco were the tools that made the permit process customer friendly. The weaker elements included confusing policies and procedures, and inconsistent information within and among departments.
Strengths
• Online electrical and plumbing permits. • Complaint Tracking System. • New Over-The-Counter (OTC) process. • Professionalism and knowledge of DBI staff. • Frequent training for both staff and public. • DBI pre-application conferences.
Weaknesses
• Lack of communication among Plan Review Services and Inspection Services. • Mostly serial vs. parallel plan review process. • Lack of accountability of work performed by staff. • Low staffing levels. • Confusion between permit number vs. permit application number. • Revision, renewal, and extension policies. • Lack of established guidelines for different disciplines. • No online permits for simple building permits. • Limited number of Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs) on website. • Lack of centralization of permit and plan review functions. • Lack of interdepartmental notification procedures. • Misrouting of permit applications. • Difficulty in obtaining general answers to code questions, both in person and
online. • Lack of advertising, notification of services.
December 2007 Page 16
• Problem identifying recurring mistakes in plan review. Lack of adequate quality control, accountability among supervisors and staff.
• Lack of standards of quality of work required of permit applicants. • Lack of proper nametags to identify city staff to the public. • Lost plans and permit applications, resulting in the need for duplicate permit
applications and plans to be provided by customers. • Inconsistent requirements among departments, resulting in confusion. • Too much paper being used, rather than using automated systems. • Confusion regarding conditional use posting requirements by Planning
Department and DBI appeals processes. • Inconsistent policies related to Temporary Certificate of Occupancy (TCO) and
Certificate of Final Completion and Occupancy (CFC). • Lack of follow up of contractors’ information on permit applications. • Inconsistent valuation of scope of work. • Difficulty in finding and obtaining records at the Planning Department. • Inconsistent standards among departments for quality of materials required for
applications. • Confusion over permit numbers and scope of work when revisions are
required for a project that has already received permits. • Lack of consistent turnaround times for project review. • Confusing permit renewal and extension policies. • No in-house training manuals, operating procedures, etc. • Rechecks performed by more than one division. • Too many tasks performed by staff causing bottlenecks and longer lines of
waiting customers.
Opportunities • Centralize application and plan review functions. • Improve the working relationship among agencies. • Increase the amount of automation and paperless transfer of information. • Changes to City Charter as required to streamline the process.
Threats
• Lack of willingness to change the culture and operating procedures within multiple city agencies.
December 2007 Page 17
II. ANALYSIS OF BENCHMARKING SURVEY AND STAKEHOLDER SURVEY
Benchmarking Survey from Other Cities:
Of 31 jurisdictions that were contacted, representatives from six responded, only one of which was within California. The respondents were from:
• Montreal, Quebec, Canada • St. Paul, Minnesota • Honolulu, Hawaii • Portland, Oregon • Miami, Florida • Los Angeles, California
Findings:
1. Most had some sort of customer greeting by staff with some knowledge of the
process.
2. Most had some kind of tutorial for the public on the permit process. 3. Very few had tutorials for the public on code issues. 4. Intake standards varied among municipalities, depending upon department size. 5. Only a few had an internal permit tracking system. Those that did often released
drawings to the applicant after initial review. 6. All plan examiners were responsible for reviewing more than one discipline. 7. No departments had a separate agency for reviewing disability access for publicly
funded projects. 8. All departments required additional permits when there were changes to the existing
scope of work.
9. All departments had some form of OTC review and approvals. 10. Only a few had enhanced permit review services and these were normally due to third
party plan checking services. 11. All departments had a central cashier station.
December 2007 Page 18
Stakeholder Survey from Customers: As of August 29, 2007, there were 57 responses from the solicitation of 350 repeat customers, as well as walk-in customers at the Permit Center. The profiles of the respondents were as follows:
Large architecture firm: 6 Small architecture firm: 7 Large contracting company: 7 Small contracting company: 8 Permit consultant: 5 City Planner: 1 Attorney: 1 Utility/Telecom Company: 1 Unknown, but knowledgeable about the process: 8 Unknown, but not knowledgeable about the process: 5 Unknown: 8 TOTAL 57
Findings: 1. The bar charts that accompany the online survey generated by SurveyMonkey.com are
misleading, as they do not accurately gauge the sentiment of the respondents. It is more important to look at the individual responses and manually analyze the trends.
2. Generally, the respondents gave staff of DBI high marks for being courteous and trying to
be helpful. There were mixed reviews regarding the Planning Department staff. 3. Respondents were more favorable when obtaining simple or OTC permits. Those frequent
customers that obtain more complex permits were much more critical of the system, but made a distinction between reacting favorably towards city employees vs. the process, which they reacted to unfavorably.
4. There was a universally favorable response regarding DBI’s training program for both staff
and the public. 5. There was a universally favorable response regarding DBI’s Public Service Division. 6. Those that were aware of recent changes at DBI since Director Hasenin’s arrival were
favorable. 7. Primary complaints about the process, particularly for the more complex permit
applications included:
a. Inconsistent instructions and code interpretations by permit reviewers. b. Inconsistent interpretation and instructions by Planning Department staff, due to the
discretionary nature of all Planning Department submittals. Long delays in permit processing at the Planning Department and long waits for cases to be calendared at hearings.
December 2007 Page 19
c. Lack of pertinent processing information and contact information on websites or handouts from DBI, Planning Department and other agencies, such as Department of Public Works - Bureau of Street Use and Mapping (DPW-BSM), Redevelopment Agency (SFRA), San Francisco Fire Department (SFFD), Department of Public Health (DPH), Mayor’s Office on Disability (MOD), San Francisco Public Utilities Commission (SFPUC), etc.
d. Most architects and permit consultants were concerned about retribution. e. Lengthy delays at the Central Permit Bureau (CPB) to obtain permit and pay fees. f. Rechecks of the same information by different stations or divisions. The lack of online
permit applications. Recommendations from Stakeholders:
The recommendations from stakeholders were quite similar to those developed by the subcommittee. They have been incorporated into the subcommittee recommendations, immediately following this section. They include: 1. Make the permit review process more streamlined, including providing more OTC
possibilities. 2. Provide more web-based solutions to permit tracking and permit applications. 3. Reduce unnecessary rechecks of plans. 4. Ensure faster turnaround times for submitted permit applications. 5. Provide more opportunities for enhanced services for additional fees. 6. Ensure more consistency in code interpretations and standards for what is required on
drawing submittals.
December 2007 Page 20
III. PLAN REVIEW AND PERMIT ISSUANCE SUBCOMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS
A. PLAN REVIEW AND PERMIT ISSUANCE: OVERALL PROCESS
1. New Permit Center on one or two floors for all agency review; perhaps at a new building location in the future. 2. Initial staff contact must be familiar with the whole process – identify needs for permit and give consistent answers.
a. Provide more frequent regularly scheduled in-house training to improve knowledge base of all staff and improve consistency of interpretations. These trainings should be hands on and job specific. b. Improve recruiting and hiring policies to improve technical expertise. c. Increase written policies and procedures for plan reviewers.
3. All staff at all agencies to have nametags. 4. Provide more quality control throughout review process.
5. Maintain adequate staffing levels at all public counters to meet customer
demands, including full time hours, “buddy system” for on-call back up technicians.
6. Make location of application more clear to the public through the Permit Tracking
System (PTS). Use “buddy system,” to prevent submittals from lingering on people’s desks during vacation or leave times.
7. Install an automated customer tracking system to provide comprehensive
routing and screening, inquiries/questions from the public, etc. a. Identify customer by name and track throughout while the customer is in the
building, as well as while the project is being reviewed. b. Identify staff and track each staff action throughout the review process. c. Ensure appropriate customer flow to eliminate bottlenecks. d. Provide a mechanism to inform the customer of the average turnaround
review time (How long it will take for a plan reviewer to start looking at a set of plans when the application is submitted today).
8. Develop a better process to identify need for permit versus those items that
may not need a permit. 9. Provide better internal communications among staff, between divisions and
between agencies. Provide cross training between divisions and departments. 10. Eliminate duplicate reviews that result in overlapping work. Separate tasks
within stations to eliminate overburdening of staff and reduce turnaround time for customer.
December 2007 Page 21
a. Make parallel plan review process available for all projects. b. Within the parallel plan review process, provide multi-agency approach to
notify customers of general information, pre-application conferences, plan review and plan check comments.
c. Provide consistency in code interpretations and submittal requirements among plan reviewers.
11. Give technical staff the authority to route/assign applications. This requires
better initial screening with more technical expertise. 12. Increase the opportunity for the customer to obtain permits and access
general information and other customer services online.
a. Provide online fee estimation calculation. b. Provide permit application submittal guidelines and checklists, including clear
written process for permit application and review. c. Provide a comprehensive organizational chart for each agency – Planning
Department, DPW-BSM, DBI, SFFD, MOD, SFRA, SFPUC, DPH, etc. Help guide people on how to connect to the correct information and city staff resource. Include SFRA jurisdiction maps to be available online to all.
d. Provide automated notification of customers including via email. 13. Intake/permit review:
a. Improve the process with more up-front screening. b. Have clear and integrated automation process; including:
o A combined street/address/verification process. o Fewer, more accurate application and customer information forms. o One permit/project number, so entire process may include digitized/electronic submittals.
14. Create permit application submittal guidelines, checklists from each
department and make them available online and in hard copy. 15. Demand an improvement to the quality of work coming in. Follow the lead of
other cities (“If not good enough or missing info, come back when you are ready.” “If we are raising the bar for ourselves, we are also raising the bar for our customers.”)
a. Guidelines and checklists should be available in hardcopy and online. b. Include specific agency interpretations such as Federal Fair Housing Act
requirements.
16. Create a unified permit and complaint system for better tracking. 17. Improve coordination among plan review and inspections, to reduce in-house
field changes. 18. Shorten turnaround times for project application reviews.
December 2007 Page 22
19. Centralize all cashier functions, except for the following:
a. Records management (reproductions of drawings or records). b. Planning Department services (Conditional Use, Variance, Discretionary
Review, and Major Environmental Analysis). 20. Separate the cashier function from all other tasks that have traditionally been
performed by Central Permit Bureau employees, to prevent extensive wait times. a. DBI Records – Retain separate cash transactions, due to location of service
at permit center. Retain five business days turnaround. b. Planning Department records – Retain the transaction for obtaining copies
through the clerical staff at the Planning Department, providing there is a maximum five business days turnaround.
21. Create a database of city buildings, including easements. 22. Re-evaluate and continue to improve the process beyond what is established
as a result of the BPR process.
B. DEPARTMENT OF BUILDING INSPECTION: PERMIT CENTER
1. Station 1 - Registration: Provide initial check in station to identify needs of the customer with general information and registration functions.
General Information Counter functions; customer may choose one of two
options:
• Option 1: First station is to be used by all customers for all agency matters – to be called the Registration Counter – one central station for all needs.
• Option 2: Would allow frequent customers to use a self check-in process at a kiosk in lieu of the registration counter above.
• Both options would be connected to a newly installed automated customer tracking system to track all customers (permits, inspections, complaints, records, etc). Enable customer priority in the queue for next day if process not completed the same day.
• General screening personnel must be familiar with entire process to determine customer needs, answer general questions, direct customer to person who can answer more specific questions, permit application, plan review, inspection, etc.
• If permit related, then route customer to next station (see Station 2 below). • Total time for interacting with customer not to exceed 60 seconds.
2. Station 2 – Initial Permit Review (IPR) Station: Customers applying for permits are to be sent by Registration Counter or self-help kiosk to this station. This counter is to be staffed by a new classification level with expertise between Building Inspectors (6331) and Principal Clerks (1408); to be called “Permit Technician”. This staff will enter all information into PTS (all permit applications will now be paperless), determine routing to subsequent stations for review, depending on the type of permit application, check for completeness of submittal
December 2007 Page 23
(both digital application forms and drawings), check Housing Inspection status, check for registered violations on PTS, checks general information such as block, lot, occupancy class, use, metes/bounds, address or adds new address to PTS, agent disclosure information, owner-builder declaration, inclusionary housing requirements, determine fee valuations, check approval of green recycling program, check status of San Francisco Business Tax Registration, Workers’ Compensation and Contractor’s information from the Contractors State License Board database, and approve simple permits.
Other staff responsibilities at counters that are part of Station 2 (may be done by newly trained 1408 clerks): Provide plans under 15 calendar days hold to view, organize and mail 300 foot radius notices when required, handle expired permit renewals, send notice of permit cancellation or letters of disapproval, process permit withdrawals and refunds, provide bilingual translation services, change owner/contractor information on permit applications when necessary.
Additional Recommendations:
• All applications and forms are to be electronic, so they may be entered into PTS.
• Track staff comments, answers, determinations, requirements, etc. Tie tracking system to PTS.
• Provide better access to Assessor’s Office database to cover all address issues and access to other city agencies’ databases.
• When projects are required to be reviewed by the Planning Department, they should be routed there first. After the Planning Department has reviewed the application, a “shotgun” or parallel plan check review process (depending on type of permit) is to be performed at other stations.
• Maintain express window for electrical and plumbing permits. • Permit Technician: last sign-off station, checks for completeness of set and
sign-offs from other stations, stamps approved drawings and issues them to applicant.
• Note: IPR station is to have multiple staff with differing skills (express, submittals, etc.) to minimize bottlenecks.
3. Station 3 – Cashier: provide separate cashier station for all transactions
except DBI and Planning Department records.
4. Install a customer Self-Help Center with amenities including: copy machine, fax, phone, computer, available forms, online access, office supplies, plan layout and work area.
5. Increase opportunities for online permit application filing and issuance, such as some DPW-BSM and simple DBI permits.
C. PLANNING DEPARTMENT
1. Separate tasks between telephone duty, intake, general questions, records
management, and complaint filing to speed up the lines and ensure better customer service.
December 2007 Page 24
2. Handle triage during initial screening at the IPR station, to enable better answers, rather than having a customer wait in line, only to be told to come back with proper information.
• Provide checklist for DBI staff to properly check for completeness of submittal.
3. Offer pre-application meetings with written decisions by staff for both residential
projects, and for larger projects, that include a multi-disciplinary review. The caveat remains that all Planning Department applications are discretionary.
4. Form a Task Force with DBI to address:
• The problems and conflicts with replacement windows in existing structures. a. Define when and where wood clad windows, vinyl clad windows and aluminum clad windows may be used. Training is needed for both DBI and Planning Department staff members to provide consistency in interpretations. b. Provide online and published public notification, once this has been established. c. Establish clear delineation of Planning Department requirements, including the building locations where this policy will be enforced. Currently there is great inconsistency. d. The conflicts with existing property line windows on adjacent properties where revocable easements have not been recorded and where new construction will obstruct these windows. This will address many cases that currently result in discretionary review filings. This will be resolved in the near future by the Zoning Administrator issuing a letter of determination. e. The allowable use of “imminent collapse” claimed in demolition permits. f. The definition and application of the Planning Department’s definition of demolition, to avoid the stopping of work during construction, particularly when there is an increase to the scope of work as a result of damage discovered after obtaining the building permit.
5. Coordinate the notification requirements, using a Universal Planning
Notification (UPN) process between DBI and Planning Department for those projects that include both demolition and:
a. Variance b. Conditional Use c. Planning Code Section 311-312 Notifications
6. Eliminate delays in project reviews before notices have gone out, before hold
periods begin and hearings occur, as well as after hearings have been completed and drawings are ready to be transferred to DBI.
7. Average turnaround times for appointments for conditional use, variance,
environmental review applications to be 10 business days.
December 2007 Page 25
D. DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS - BUREAU OF STREET USE AND MAPPING (DPW-BSM)
1. Have permanent presence at the new Permit Center, including additional staff
to conduct some Over-The-Counter (OTC) application review. a. Provide check list for DBI staff to properly check for completeness of
submittal. 2. Create a Task Force at the Director level to discuss potential policy
changes between DBI, Planning Department, DPW-BSM, and PG&E to come up with solution regarding underground vaults in sidewalks.
a. Pre-application required for PG&E vault within seven business days. b. Recommend that the Office of the City Attorney determine PG&E
obligations to the city and customers for maintaining their distribution. c. Office of the City Attorney to investigate legality of PG&E
practices/obligation to city, especially charging property owners for multi-use network vaults.
d. Problem: Major design issue as it conflicts with Planning Department guidelines. Need policy-level discussion on multiple demands for vaults under sidewalks.
e. Problem: Installing sidewalk vaults – lack of coordination among PG&E, DPW-BSM and Planning Department. Current criteria: usually allowed when serving more than one developer. Need to address single developments. The smaller the development and the narrower the street exposure, the greater impact utility closets have on the ground floor street frontage.
f. Solution: Develop a process for pre-application meetings with PG&E, DPW-BSM, and Planning Department within five business days, so that project sponsor can obtain approvals for vaults at the front end of the entitlement process.
3. Change review for some permits (such as sidewalk replacement with no changes) to be OTC without plans. Change the review of other permits (such as simple sidewalk permits without special encroachments) to be OTC with plans.
E. DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC HEALTH (DPH)
1. Provide permanent presence at the new Permit Center, including additional staff to conduct some OTC application review. a. Provide checklist for DBI staff to properly check for completeness of
submittal.
December 2007 Page 26
F. REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY (SFRA)
1. Provide permanent presence at the new Permit Center, including additional staff to conduct some OTC application review.
a. Provide check list for DBI staff to properly check for completeness of submittal.
G. MAYOR’S OFFICE ON DISABILITY (MOD)
1. Create an on-call service to enable a representative from MOD to be available
for the OTC and parallel plan checking processes.
a. Provide checklist for DBI staff to properly check for completeness of submittal.
H. SAN FRANCISCO FIRE DEPARTMENT (SFFD)
1. Identify plan review responsibilities, more specifically between the SFFD
and DBI, to avoid overlap and recheck of some items. I. SAN FRANCISCO PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION (SFPUC)
1. SFPUC requires plans to show fixture counts and calculations to determine fees.
a. Include information at pre-application conferences. b. Transfer some plan review responsibilities to DBI, to avoid overlap and
recheck of some items. Provide checklist for DBI staff to properly check for completeness of submittal.
J. GENERAL RECOMMENDATIONS:
1. Access State Contractor’s License Board and Workers’ Compensation
information. 2. DBI’s ability to issue a new business license. 3. DBI needs to have real time access to streamline registration, renewals, and
verification. 4. New SFPUC fees and regulations: DBI staff to continue to meet with SFPUC
BPR participants to address the following issues:
a. Clarify SFPUC requirements for types of buildings based on fee changes beginning January 1, 2008. b. Clarify Water Department issue of “new” versus “existing” service if it is a
remodel or new construction. Water Department relies on DBI’s designation, which may not be correct.
c. Tie fees for water/wastewater capacity charges when permit is issued. d. Wastewater capacity charge paid at permit issuance, as of January
2008. Follow newly adopted procedures by the SFPUC. • SFPUC to send general information and criteria for IPR station to have during initial screening.
December 2007 Page 27
• Pre-application conference will be necessary to tag items that have not yet been adopted as agency policy, but are part of the negotiations during the entitlement process.
5. Further coordination among SFFD and DBI is needed to eliminate overlapping plan review functions and rechecks. a. Solution: SFFD is to provide checklist criteria for IPR staff to check
or completeness. SFFD staff will still need to be part of IPR process, to review items in question, solely under the purview of the SFFD. Once checklist has been established, SFFD is to work with DBI on which plan check items will be checked and rechecked by the respective agencies.
6. Conflicts between DBI demolition policy and Planning Department’s Discretionary Review Policy regarding the definition of demolition, substantial alteration, replacement building, etc.
a. A task force is to be created with representatives from each Commission to evaluate and recommend changes to eliminate conflicts.
7. The need to improve the coordination of Planning Department
conditions of approval (results of conditional use, variance, CEQA appeals, discretionary review or other hearings), so they are properly identified with the permit application numbers at DBI during plan review.
8. The Planning Department has requested that an additional copy of the approved
site permit drawings be retained at the Planning Department to ensure that the drawings processed at the processing station matches the originally approved drawings.
a. Solution: additional third set of drawings is required to be submitted for approval by the customer. The Planning Department retains one copy, while the other two copies are forwarded to the processing station for customer pick up and use for the addendum submittal.
December 2007 Page 28
IV. MAPPING
USING THE MAPS
There are separate maps for each of five general types of plan review and permitting processes, including Over-The-Counter Without Plans, Over-The- Counter With Plans, Residential Alterations and Additions, Residential Demolition and New Construction, and New High Rises. There is also a map for electrical and plumbing permits. With the exception of mapping for the Central Permit Bureau functions and electrical and plumbing permits, each plan review and permitting process has an “As-Is” map, showing the existing plan review and permitting procedures and a “To-Be” map, showing proposed plan review and permitting procedures. After each “As-Is” and “To-Be” map, there is a list of primary “issues” in the process that were discovered during SWOT analysis and data gathering efforts, and a narrative describing the step-by-step “To-Be” process.
December 2007 Page 29
A. CENTRAL PERMIT BUREAU
Due to the reorganization of CPB’s functions, its tasks will be shown within the “To-Be” Mapping of each of the typical “To-Be” maps.
Aug
ust 1
4,20
07
BPR
-Pla
n R
evie
w a
nd P
erm
it Is
suan
ce S
ubco
mm
ittee
As-
IsM
appi
ng:
Cen
tral
Perm
itB
urea
u (C
PB) S
impl
e Pe
rmit
with
out P
lans
–O
ver-
The-
Cou
nter
(OTC
)
Sim
ple
Perm
itw
ithou
t Pla
nsO
TC
Cen
tral P
erm
itB
urea
u8:
00 A
M –
4:30
PM
558-
6070
Sig
nin
on
Pin
k C
lipbo
ard
Wai
ttim
e:20
min
utes
~ 2
hou
rs
Cal
ls D
istri
ctIn
spec
tor t
oS
tart
Wor
k
WO
RK
UN
DE
RW
AY
1408
Cle
rical
Sta
ffre
view
s fo
rco
mpl
eten
ess
and
accu
racy
Ent
ers
all i
nfor
mat
ion
into
Per
mit
Trac
king
Sys
tem
,in
clud
ing
valu
atio
n, ro
utin
g of
revi
ewpr
oces
s, o
ther
info
rmat
ion
from
Age
nt D
iscl
osur
e Fo
rm, R
-1 T
enan
tD
islo
catio
n Fo
rm, O
wne
r-B
uild
er D
ecla
ratio
n
Ass
igns
Per
mit
Appl
icat
ion
Num
ber
Blo
ck a
nd L
ot, o
ccup
ancy
clas
s, u
nit c
ount
rese
arch
on
AV
S, m
aps,
per
mit
hist
ory,
etc
.
Ver
ifies
gen
eral
info
rmat
ion
such
as b
lock
and
lot,
addr
ess,
occu
panc
y cl
ass/
use
Pla
n E
xam
iner
cor
rect
s
Ver
ifies
sign
atur
es a
nd p
rope
rro
utin
g on
form
.
Ret
urns
to C
PB
Wro
ng in
form
atio
n
No
supp
ortin
g do
cum
ents
.M
ore
rese
arch
mus
t be
done
to fi
nd/a
dd a
ddre
ss
Che
ck S
tate
Con
tract
or’s
Lice
nse,
SF
Bus
ines
s Ta
xR
egis
tratio
n, a
nd W
orke
rsC
ompe
nsat
ion
(if n
eede
d) in
Con
tract
or In
form
atio
nD
atab
ase
Firs
t tim
e C
ontra
ctor
app
lyin
gW
ith n
o pr
oof o
f doc
umen
tatio
nor
Exp
ired
licen
ses/
insu
ranc
e
Sta
te C
ontra
ctor
’sLi
cens
e Bo
ard
Mus
t ren
ew a
nd re
turn
with
pro
of
Insu
ranc
e
City
Hal
lTa
x C
olle
ctor
’s O
ffice
8:00
AM
–5:
00 P
M
Per
mit
with
Con
tract
orU
ndec
lare
d
Return to CPB with proper documents
Pay
men
t by
cash
, che
ck, V
isa
or M
aste
rCar
d.En
ter d
ata
into
PTS
.P
roce
ss o
n P
OS
.
Prin
t Per
mit,
Fill
out
Job
Car
d w
ith a
pplic
atio
nnu
mbe
r and
exp
iratio
n da
te. A
ttach
oth
erin
form
atio
n su
ch a
s “G
ener
al In
form
atio
n ab
out
Con
stru
ctio
n in
San
Fra
ncis
co” a
nd S
F E
nviro
nmen
tbr
ochu
re o
n C
onst
ruct
ion/
Dem
oliti
on W
aste
proc
edur
es
If pa
ying
by
Com
pany
Cre
dit C
ard,
Mus
t hav
e C
ompa
ny’s
Aut
horiz
atio
n Le
tter
If pr
oble
m, s
end
to o
rigin
al p
lan
revi
ewer
Cor
rect
edR
etur
ns to
CP
B
Che
ck d
ata
ente
red
byS
tatio
n2
OTC
cou
nter
or 4
th F
loor
is c
orre
ct
Issu
es p
erm
it,Jo
b ca
rd, a
nd g
ives
to c
usto
mer
Oth
er C
PB D
utie
s:A
nsw
er m
isce
llane
ous
ques
tions
Add
ress
ass
ignm
ents
Prov
ide
plan
s un
der 1
5 ca
lend
arda
ys h
old
tovi
ew30
0'M
ail o
f prin
cipa
lpo
rtion
(DB
Ipo
licy)
Exp
ired
perm
it re
new
als
Ext
ensi
on o
f per
mits
stil
lund
erfil
ing
Not
ice
of P
erm
it C
ance
llatio
n /
Lette
r ofD
isap
prov
alP
erm
it w
ithdr
awal
Mai
ntai
n lis
t ofn
otifi
catio
nsB
iling
ual t
rans
latio
nC
hang
e ow
ner/c
ontra
ctor
Ref
unds
Mee
tings
, tra
inin
gs
Sto
rage
Roo
m to
be
Mic
rofil
med
Pic
ked
up b
y P
ublic
Ser
vice
s D
ivis
ion
Sta
ff
Aug
ust 1
4, 2
007
BPR
– P
lan
Rev
iew
and
Per
mit
Issu
ance
Sub
com
mitt
ee A
s-Is
Map
ping
: C
entr
al P
erm
it B
urea
u (C
PB)S
impl
e Pe
rmit
with
Pla
ns –
Ove
r-Th
e-C
ount
er (O
TC)
Sim
ple
Perm
itw
ith P
lans
OTC
Cen
tral P
erm
itB
urea
u8:
00 A
M –
4:30
PM
558-
6070
Take
a n
umbe
rW
aitti
me:
30 m
inut
es ~
2 h
ours
Cal
ls D
istri
ct In
spec
tor t
oS
tart
Wor
k
WO
RK
UN
DE
RW
AY
1408
Cle
rical
Sta
ffre
view
s fo
rco
mpl
eten
ess
and
accu
racy
Ent
ers
all i
nfor
mat
ion
into
Per
mit
Trac
king
Sys
tem
,in
clud
ing
valu
atio
n, ro
utin
g of
revi
ewpr
oces
s, o
ther
info
rmat
ion
from
Age
nt D
iscl
osur
e Fo
rm, R
-1 T
enan
tD
islo
catio
n Fo
rm, O
wne
r-B
uild
er D
ecla
ratio
n
Ass
igns
Per
mit
Appl
icat
ion
Num
ber
Blo
ck a
nd L
ot, o
ccup
ancy
clas
s, u
nit c
ount
rese
arch
on
AV
S, m
aps,
per
mit
hist
ory,
etc
.
Ver
ifies
gen
eral
info
rmat
ion
such
as
bloc
k an
d lo
t and
addr
ess,
occ
upan
cycl
ass/
use
Pla
n E
xam
iner
cor
rect
s
Ver
ifies
sign
atur
es a
nd p
rope
rro
utin
g on
form
.Lo
ok a
t pla
ns fo
r cor
rect
/co
mpl
eten
ess/
disc
repa
ncy
Ret
urns
to C
PB
Wro
ng in
form
atio
n
No
supp
ortin
g do
cum
ents
.M
ore
rese
arch
mus
t be
done
to fi
nd/a
dd a
ddre
ss
Che
ck S
tate
Con
tract
or’s
Lice
nse,
SF
Bus
ines
s Ta
xR
egis
tratio
n, a
nd W
orke
rs’
Com
p (if
nee
ded)
inC
ontra
ctor
Info
rmat
ion
Dat
abas
e
Firs
t tim
e C
ontra
ctor
app
lyin
gW
ith n
o pr
oof o
f doc
umen
tatio
nor
Exp
ired
licen
ses/
insu
ranc
e
Sta
te C
ontra
ctor
’sLi
cens
e Bo
ard
Mus
t ren
ewan
d re
turn
with
pro
of
Insu
ranc
e
City
Hal
lTa
x C
olle
ctor
’s O
ffice
8:00
AM
–5:
00 P
M
Per
mit
with
Con
tract
orU
ndec
lare
d
Returnto CPB with proper documents
Pay
men
t by
cash
, che
ck, V
isa
or M
aste
rCar
d.E
nter
dat
ain
to P
TS.
Pro
cess
on
PO
S.
Prin
t Per
mit,
Fill
out
Job
Car
d w
ith a
pplic
atio
nnu
mbe
r and
exp
iratio
n da
te. A
ttach
oth
erin
form
atio
n su
ch a
s “G
ener
al In
form
atio
nab
out
Con
stru
ctio
n in
San
Fra
ncis
co” a
nd S
F En
viro
nmen
tbr
ochu
re o
n C
onst
ruct
ion/
Dem
oliti
onlit
ion
Was
tepr
oced
ures
If pa
ying
by
Com
pany
Cre
dit C
ard,
Mus
thav
eC
ompa
ny’s
Aut
horiz
atio
n Le
tter
Ifpr
oble
m,s
end
to o
rigin
al P
lan
Exa
min
er
Ret
urns
to C
PB
Che
ck d
ata
ente
red
by
4th F
loor
is c
orre
ct
Che
ck fo
r fee
s du
e an
d pa
idfo
r fro
m S
F U
nifie
d S
choo
lD
istri
ct, T
IDF,
etc
…
Che
ck E
ngin
eer/A
rchi
tect
’slic
ense
num
ber s
tam
ped
on
all s
heet
sof
pla
ns
Che
ck O
SH
A, B
AA
QM
D“J
num
ber”
For D
emol
ition
, wor
kshe
etfro
m D
ept o
f Env
ironm
ent
Pay
fees
at o
ther
age
ncie
s
Writ
e P
erm
it A
pplic
atio
nnu
mbe
r at e
nd o
f pla
n sh
eets
Mis
sing
sta
mps
CP
Bba
ck ro
omst
orag
e fo
r to
be
mic
rofil
med
(Pic
ked
up b
y P
ublic
Ser
vice
sD
ivis
ion
Sta
ff w
ithin
1 ~
8 m
onth
s)
Other stampedand signed set
to CPB back room
Issu
es p
erm
it,Jo
b ca
rd, a
nd g
ives
one
set
of p
lans
to c
usto
mer
Oth
er C
PB D
utie
s:A
ddre
ss a
ssig
nmen
tsA
nsw
er m
isce
llane
ous
ques
tions
Pro
vide
pla
ns u
nder
15 c
alen
dar d
ays
hold
tovi
ew30
0'M
ail o
f prin
cipa
l por
tion
(DB
I pol
icy)
Exp
ired
perm
itre
new
als
Ext
ensi
on o
f per
mits
stil
lund
erfil
ing
Not
ice
of P
erm
it C
ance
llatio
n / L
ette
rof D
isap
prov
alPe
rmit
with
draw
alM
aint
ain
list o
fnot
ifica
tions
Bili
ngua
l tra
nsla
tion
Cha
nge
owne
r/con
tract
orR
efun
dsM
eetin
gs, t
rain
ings
Aug
ust 1
5. 2
007
BPR
– P
lan
Rev
iew
and
Per
mit
Issu
ance
Subc
omm
ittee
As-
Is M
appi
ng: C
entr
alPe
rmit
Bur
eau
(CPB
) Fili
ng -
Add
ition
s
STA
RT
Hor
izon
tal/
Vert
ical
Add
ition
Rea
dy fo
r Ina
ke/
Filin
g
Cen
tral P
erm
itB
urea
u8:
00 A
M –
4:30
PM
558-
6070
Take
a n
umbe
rW
aitti
me:
30 m
inut
es ~
2 h
ours
1408
Cle
rical
Sta
ffre
view
s fo
rco
mpl
eten
ess
and
accu
racy
Ent
ers
all i
nfor
mat
ion
into
Per
mit
Trac
king
Sys
tem
,in
clud
ing
valu
atio
n, ro
utin
g of
revi
ewpr
oces
s, o
ther
info
rmat
ion
from
Age
nt D
iscl
osur
e Fo
rm, R
-1 T
enan
tD
islo
catio
n Fo
rm, O
wne
r-B
uild
er D
ecla
ratio
n
Ass
igns
Per
mit
Appl
icat
ion
Num
ber
Blo
ck a
nd L
ot, o
ccup
ancy
clas
s, u
nit c
ount
rese
arch
on
AV
S, m
aps,
per
mit
hist
ory,
etc
.
Ver
ifies
gen
eral
info
rmat
ion
such
as
bloc
k/lo
t and
add
ress
,oc
cupa
ncy
clas
s/us
e
Pla
n E
xam
iner
cor
rect
s
Ver
ifies
sign
atur
es a
nd p
rope
rro
utin
g on
form
.Lo
ok a
t pla
ns fo
r cor
rect
/co
mpl
eten
ess/
disc
repa
ncy
Ret
urns
to C
PB
Wro
ng in
fo
No
supp
ortin
g do
cum
ents
.M
ore
rese
arch
mus
t be
done
to fi
nd/a
dd a
ddre
ss
Che
ck S
tate
Con
tract
ors’
Lice
nse,
SF
Bus
ines
s Ta
xR
egis
tratio
n, a
nd W
orke
rs’
Com
p (if
nee
ded)
inC
ontra
ctor
Info
rmat
ion
Dat
abas
e
Firs
t tim
e C
ontra
ctor
app
lyin
gW
ith n
o pr
oof o
f doc
umen
tatio
nor
Exp
ired
licen
ses/
insu
ranc
e
Sta
te C
ontra
ctor
’sLi
cens
e Bo
ard
Mus
t ren
ewan
d re
turn
with
pro
of
Insu
ranc
e
City
Hal
lTa
x C
olle
ctor
’s O
ffice
8:00
AM
–5:
00 P
M
Per
mit
with
Con
tract
orU
ndec
lare
d
Returnto CPB with proper documents
Pay
men
t by
cash
, che
ck,V
isa
or M
aste
rCar
d.E
nter
dat
a in
to P
TS.
Pro
cess
on
PO
S.
Han
d w
rites
Pla
n C
heck
Rec
eipt
and
give
s to
Cus
tom
erC
usto
mer
fills
out
Yel
low
Pos
tcar
d
If pa
ying
by C
ompa
ny C
redi
tCar
d,M
ust h
ave
Com
pany
’s A
utho
rizat
ion
Lette
r
Ifpr
oble
m,s
end
to o
rigin
al P
lan
Exa
min
er
Cor
rect
ions
Mad
eR
etur
ns to
CP
B
Che
ck d
ata
ente
red
by 4
th
Floo
r is
corr
ect
Che
ck E
ngin
eer/A
rchi
tect
’slic
ense
num
ber s
tam
ped
on
all s
heet
sof
pla
ns
Writ
e P
erm
itA
pplic
atio
nnu
mbe
r at e
nd o
f pla
n sh
eets
Mis
sing
sta
mps
Sen
ds P
erm
itA
pplic
atio
n an
d P
lans
To n
ext s
tatio
n on
rout
ing
slip
FIN
ISH
Oth
er C
PB D
utie
s:A
nsw
er m
isce
llane
ous
ques
tions
Add
ress
ass
ignm
ents
Pro
vide
pla
nsun
der1
5 da
y ho
ld to
view
300'
Mai
l of p
rinci
pal p
ortio
n(D
BI
polic
y)E
xpire
d pe
rmit
rene
wal
sE
xten
sion
of p
erm
its s
tillu
nder
filin
gN
otic
e of
Per
mit
Can
cella
tion
/Le
tter o
f Dis
appr
oval
Per
mit
with
draw
alM
aint
ain
list o
f not
ifica
tions
Bili
ngua
l tra
nsla
tion
Cha
nge
owne
r/con
tract
orR
efun
dsM
eetin
gs, t
rain
ings
Aug
ust 1
5, 2
007
BPR
-Pl
an R
evie
w a
nd P
erm
it Is
suan
ce S
ubco
mm
ittee
As-
Is M
appi
ng: C
entr
al P
erm
it B
urea
u (C
PB) F
iling
New
Con
stru
ctio
n w
ith D
emol
ition
STA
RT
Rea
ding
for F
iling
Cen
tral P
erm
itB
urea
u8:
00 A
M –
4:30
PM
558-
6070
Take
a n
umbe
rW
aitti
me:
30 m
inut
es ~
2 h
ours
1408
Cle
rical
Sta
ffre
view
s fo
rco
mpl
eten
ess
and
accu
racy
Ent
ers
all i
nfor
mat
ion
into
Per
mit
Trac
king
Sys
tem
,in
clud
ing
valu
atio
n,ro
utin
g of
revi
ew p
roce
ss, o
ther
info
rmat
ion
from
Age
nt D
iscl
osur
e Fo
rm, O
wne
rB
uild
er D
ecla
ratio
n, In
clus
iona
ryH
ousi
ngR
equi
rem
ents
, etc
. ..
Ass
igns
Per
mit
App
licat
ion
Num
ber
Blo
ck a
nd lo
t, oc
cupa
ncy
clas
s,
unit
coun
t res
earc
h on
AV
S,
map
s,pe
rmit
hist
ory,
etc
. …
Ver
ifies
gen
eral
info
rmat
ionr
mat
ion
such
as
blo
ck a
nd lo
t,oc
cupa
ncy
clas
s/us
e,
met
es/b
ound
s, d
iagr
am o
n pe
rmit
appl
icat
ion
Pla
n E
xam
iner
cor
rect
s
Ver
ifies
sign
atur
es a
nd p
rope
rro
utin
g on
form
.Lo
ok a
t pla
ns fo
r cor
rect
/co
mpl
eten
ess/
disc
repa
ncy
Ret
urns
to C
PB
Wro
ng in
form
atio
n
No
supp
ortin
g do
cum
ents
.M
ore
rese
arch
mus
t be
done
to re
solv
e is
sue
Che
ck S
tate
Con
tract
ors’
Lice
nse,
SF
Bus
ines
s Ta
xR
egis
tratio
n, a
nd W
orke
rs’
Com
p (if
nee
ded)
inC
ontra
ctor
info
rmat
ionr
mat
ion
Dat
abas
e
Firs
t tim
e C
ontra
ctor
app
lyin
gW
ith n
o pr
oof o
f doc
umen
tatio
nor
Exp
ired
licen
ses/
insu
ranc
e
Sta
te C
ontra
ctor
’sLi
cens
e Bo
ard
Mus
t ren
ewan
d re
turn
with
pro
of
Insu
ranc
e
City
Hal
lTa
x C
olle
ctor
’s O
ffice
8:00
AM
–5:
00 P
M
Per
mit
with
Con
tract
orU
ndec
lare
d
Returnto CPB with proper documents
Pay
men
t by
cash
, che
ck,V
isa
or M
aste
rCar
d.E
nter
dat
a in
to P
TS.
Pro
cess
on
PO
S.
Han
dw
rite
Pla
n C
heck
rece
ipta
ndgi
ve to
Cus
tom
erC
usto
mer
writ
e Y
ello
w P
ostc
ard
If pa
ying
by
Com
pany
Cre
dit C
ard,
Mus
t hav
e C
ompa
ny’s
Aut
horiz
atio
n Le
tter
Ifpr
oble
m,s
end
to o
rigin
al P
lan
Exa
min
erC
orre
ctio
ns M
ade
Ret
urns
to C
PB
Che
ck d
ata
ente
red
by 4
th F
loor
isco
rrec
t
Che
ck E
ngin
eer/A
rchi
tect
’slic
ense
num
ber s
tam
ped
on
all s
heet
sof
pla
ns
Writ
e P
erm
itA
pplic
atio
nnu
mbe
r at e
nd o
f pla
n sh
eets
Mis
sing
sta
mps
Send
s P
erm
it A
pplic
atio
nan
d pl
ans
to n
ext s
tatio
n on
Rou
ting
Slip
Che
ck a
ddre
ss o
rC
reat
e N
ewAd
dres
s
Add
ress
Pro
blem
Add
info
rmat
ionr
mat
ion
on B
lock
and
lot
Map
Dem
oliti
on N
otic
e: 2
set
sof
mai
ling
stic
kers
,af
fidav
it, 3
00' r
adiu
s m
ap,
mai
ling
list f
or fi
le
Insu
ffici
ent d
ocum
ents
FIN
ISH
Oth
er C
PB D
utie
s: A
nsw
erm
isce
llane
ous
ques
tions
Add
ress
ass
ignm
ents
Pro
vide
plan
s un
der 1
5-da
y ho
ldto
vie
w 3
00'M
ail o
f prin
cipa
l por
tion
(DB
Ipo
licy)
Exp
ired
perm
it re
new
als
Ext
ensi
on o
f per
mits
stil
lund
erfil
ing
Not
ice
of P
erm
it C
ance
llatio
n /
Lette
r ofD
isap
prov
al P
erm
itw
ithdr
awal
Mai
ntai
n lis
t ofn
otifi
catio
ns B
iling
ualt
rans
latio
n C
hang
e ow
ner/c
ontra
ctor
Ref
unds
Mee
tings
, tra
inin
gs
Aug
ust 1
5, 2
007
BPR
–Pl
anR
evie
w a
nd P
erm
it Is
suan
ceSu
bcom
mitt
ee A
s-Is
Map
ping
:Cen
tral
Perm
itB
urea
u (C
PB) P
erm
itIs
suan
ce
STA
RT
Perm
it is
A
PPR
OVE
D o
nPT
S
Cen
tral P
erm
itB
urea
u16
60 M
issi
on S
t. 1st
Flo
or8:
00 A
M –
4:30
PM
558-
6070
Take
a n
umbe
rW
ait t
ime:
30
min
utes
~ 2
hou
rs
Per
son
mus
t be
liste
d on
the
perm
it or
the
Ow
ner.
If no
t, m
ust b
ring
Lette
r of A
utho
rizat
ion
fori
ssua
nce.
Cal
ls D
istri
ctIn
spec
tor t
o S
tart
Wor
k*m
ust w
ait1
5ca
lend
ar d
ays
if D
emol
ition
per
mit*
WO
RK
UN
DE
RW
AY
1408
Cle
rical
Sta
ffge
ts p
lans
from
tem
pora
ry s
tora
ge
Priv
ate
com
pany
to g
et li
st G
et a
ppro
val f
rom
GR
PC
an a
ppea
l at
Boa
rd o
f Per
mit
App
eals
For D
emol
ition
litio
n, s
end
out
300'
Not
ifica
tion
(Nee
d ne
w li
stif
over
a y
ear)
, che
ck a
ppro
val
of G
reen
Rec
ycle
Pro
gram
(GR
P)
Oth
er a
genc
ies
to p
ay
Che
cks
to s
ee p
aym
ent o
fm
isc.
fees
/age
ncie
s an
d en
ters
into
PTS
suc
h as
SFU
SD,
TID
F,et
c. …
Ret
urns
to C
PB
No
list o
r nee
d up
date
d lis
tN
o ap
prov
al fr
omG
RP
Che
ck S
tate
Con
tract
ors’
Lice
nse,
SF
Bus
ines
s Ta
xR
egis
tratio
n, a
nd W
orke
rs’
Com
p (if
nee
ded)
inC
ontra
ctor
Info
rmat
ion
Dat
abas
e
Firs
t tim
e C
ontra
ctor
app
lyin
gW
ith n
o pr
oof o
f doc
umen
tatio
nor
Exp
ired
licen
ses/
insu
ranc
e
Sta
te C
ontra
ctor
’sLi
cens
e Bo
ard
Mus
t ren
ewan
d re
turn
with
pro
of
Insu
ranc
e
City
Hal
lTa
x C
olle
ctor
’s O
ffice
8:00
AM
–5:
00 P
M
Per
mit
with
Con
tract
orU
ndec
lare
d
Returnto CPB with proper documents
Pay
men
t by
cash
, che
ck, V
isa
or M
aste
rCar
d.E
nter
dat
a in
toP
TS.
Pro
cess
on
PO
S.
Prin
t Per
mit,
Fill
out J
ob C
ard
with
app
licat
ion
num
ber a
ndex
pira
tion
date
. Atta
ch o
ther
info
rmat
ion
such
as
“Gen
eral
Info
rmat
ion
abou
tC
onst
ruct
ion
inSa
n Fr
anci
sco”
and
SF
Env
ironm
ent b
roch
ure
onC
onst
ruct
ion/
Dem
oliti
onW
aste
pro
cedu
res
If pa
ying
by
Com
pany
Cre
dit C
ard,
Mus
t hav
e C
ompa
ny’s
Aut
horiz
atio
n Le
tter
If no
t pai
d, A
pplic
ant m
ust g
o pa
y an
d re
turn
Ret
urns
to C
PB
Ver
ify p
lans
are
pro
perly
stam
ped
by v
ario
us a
genc
ies
Sta
mp
“AP
PR
OV
ED
”on
each
shee
t
Mis
sing
sta
mps
CP
B b
ack
room
sto
rage
for t
o be
mic
rofil
med
(Pic
ked
up b
y P
SD
Sta
ff w
ithin
1 ~
8 m
onth
s)
Other stampedand signed set and
Permitto CPB back room
Issu
es p
erm
it,Jo
b ca
rd, a
nd g
ives
one
set
of p
lans
to c
usto
mer
Not
list
ed o
n pe
rmit.
No
Lette
r of A
utho
rizat
ion
Can
not i
ssue
per
mit
Non
Dem
oliti
onlit
ion
Per
mit
Upd
ate
offic
ial B
lock
Map
inO
ffice
30" x
30"
post
er p
repa
red
by C
PB s
taff,
incl
udin
gpa
stin
g pe
rmit
prin
tont
osi
gn
Oth
er C
PB D
utie
s:A
nsw
er m
isce
llane
ous
ques
tions
Add
ress
ass
ignm
ents
Pro
vide
pla
ns u
nder
15
cale
ndar
days
hol
d to
vie
w30
0' M
ailo
f prin
cipa
lpor
tion
(DBI
polic
y)E
xpire
d pe
rmit
rene
wal
sE
xten
sion
ofp
erm
its s
tillu
nder
filin
gN
otic
e of
Per
mit
Can
cella
tion
/ Le
tter o
f Dis
appP
erm
it w
ithdr
awal
Mai
ntai
n lis
t of n
otifi
catio
nsB
iling
ual t
rans
latio
nC
hang
e ow
ner/c
ontra
ctor
Ref
unds
Mee
tings
, tra
inin
gs
Aug
ust 1
4, 2
007
BPR
– P
lan
Rev
iew
and
Per
mit
Issu
ance
Sub
com
mitt
ee A
s-Is
Map
ping
: Cen
tral
Per
mit
Bur
eau
(CPB
) -B
ounc
ed C
heck
Flag
son
Div
isio
n A
pplic
atio
ns –
Con
tract
ors
Info
rmat
ion
Sys
tem
– N
oot
her p
erm
its m
aybe
issu
edto
this
appl
ican
t
Cen
tral P
erm
itB
urea
u16
60 M
issi
on S
treet
1st F
loor
Per
mit
Issu
edby
che
ck p
aym
ent
Cal
led
to S
tart
Wor
k
WO
RK
UN
DER
WA
YN
otifi
es C
entra
l Per
mit
Bur
eau
abou
tbo
unce
d ch
eck
Sen
ds W
arni
ng L
ette
r10
cal
enda
rday
s to
cle
ar w
ith $
50 b
ank
serv
ice
fee
or c
ase
will
be
sent
to C
olle
ctio
n A
genc
y in
30 c
alen
dar d
ays
and
Per
mit
will
be
susp
ende
d if
alre
ady
issu
edor
flag
ged
DO
NO
T IS
SU
E an
d su
bjec
t to
canc
ella
tion
Nam
e on
che
ckPa
yee
No
Res
pons
e.P
erm
itsu
spen
ded
or c
ance
lled
App
lican
tret
urns
with
perm
it fe
ean
dad
ditio
nal $
50 p
enal
ty fe
e.P
aym
ent b
y m
oney
ord
er,
cash
ierc
heck
or c
ash
ON
LY
Issu
e re
solv
ed.
Upd
ated
on
Div
isio
n A
pplic
atio
nsO
K fo
r ins
pect
ions
Che
ck b
ounc
es!
City
Hal
l Tax
Col
lect
or’s
Offi
ce
If C
ontra
ctor
,P
rofil
e w
illbe
flag
ged
onC
ontra
ctor
Info
rmat
ion
Scre
en
Bui
ldin
g In
spec
tion
Div
isio
n16
60 M
issi
onS
treet
3rd F
loor
Plu
mbi
ng In
spec
tion
Div
isio
n16
60 M
issi
onS
treet
3rd F
loor
Notifies DistrictInspector(s).No inspection until issue is resolved
Ele
ctric
al In
spec
tion
Div
isio
n16
60 M
issi
onS
treet
3rd F
loor
CLEARED.OK for scheduling inspections
No
Res
pons
e. N
o In
spec
tions
.P
erm
it E
xpire
s
No
Res
pons
e. N
o In
spec
tions
.P
erm
it E
xpire
s
No
Res
pons
e. N
o In
spec
tions
.P
erm
it E
xpire
s
$
$
$
Pai
d fo
rFIL
ING
a su
bmitt
al p
erm
itan
d pl
an re
view
For N
onIs
sued
Per
mits
:Pa
y is
suan
ce fe
eIS
SU
ED
STA
RT
December 2007 Page 36
B. ELECTRICAL AND PLUMBING PERMITS Electrical and plumbing permits will be handled similarly to the OTC without plans. However, the option for obtaining these permits online will remain as shown on the “As-Is” map and the personnel reviewing the applications that need greater scrutiny may be electrical and plumbing inspectors, to which the customer is routed by the IPR Permit Technician.
Aug
ust 1
0, 2
007
BPR
– P
lan
Rev
iew
and
Per
mit
Issu
ance
Sub
com
mitt
ee A
s-Is
Map
ping
: El
ectr
ical
/Plu
mbi
ng P
erm
its
STA
RT
Rej
ect.
Mus
t Hire
Lice
nsed
Con
tract
or
Pro
perty
Ow
ners
of N
onS
ingl
e Fa
mily
Det
ache
dD
wel
lings
and
/or h
avin
g a
cont
ract
or w
ho w
ant t
oap
ply
for a
per
mit
Cen
tral
Per
mit
Bur
eau
1660
Mis
sion
St,
1st F
loor
8:00
AM
–4:
30P
M14
08 C
leric
alSt
aff
Cal
ls fo
r nex
t cus
tom
erC
heck
s in
form
atio
n on
DB
I C
ontra
ctor
s In
form
atio
n S
yste
mPr
oces
ses
Perm
itO
btai
ns fe
esIs
sues
Per
mit
Elec
tric
alIn
spec
tion
Div
isio
n16
60 M
issi
on S
t, 3rd
Flo
or
7:30
AM
–4:
00 P
MC
lerk
and
Sr.
Ele
ctric
al I
nspe
ctor
Forh
omeo
wne
rs o
f SFF
D, w
ork
to b
e pr
efor
med
by
owne
r on
title
.Fo
rSol
ar p
erm
it -I
NTE
RIM
pro
cedu
re,
leav
e ap
plic
atio
n pa
ckag
e an
dpa
ymen
t. C
usto
mer
illg
et c
all t
o pi
ckup
per
mit
or p
robl
ems.
Cle
rical
sup
port
(142
4, 1
426,
1408
)ch
eck
prop
erty
pro
file
ford
etac
hed
SFF
D a
nd o
ccup
ancy
of h
omeo
wne
r at
prop
erty
Spe
akw
ith In
spec
tor(
6248
) or S
r. In
spec
tor(
6249
) to
get a
n ap
prov
al.
Upo
n ap
prov
al, c
leric
al s
uppo
rt w
illpr
oces
s th
e pe
rmit.
Hom
eow
ners
of S
ingl
eFa
mily
Det
ache
dD
wel
lings
Wor
k to
be
pref
orm
ed b
yho
meo
wne
rs
Spe
ak w
ithIn
spec
tor
Unq
ualif
ied
Mus
t Hire
Lice
nsed
Con
tract
or
$
$
$
Con
tract
or w
ith v
alid
spe
cial
ty li
cens
es re
cord
(Plu
mbi
ng: C
36, C
4, C
20, e
tc. a
nd E
lect
rical
: (C
10,C
7, C
11, C
20, C
45, C
46, C
53, D
28,D
34)
obta
in p
erm
it in
CP
B fo
rwor
k of
thei
rspe
cial
ty.
Lice
nsed
Con
tract
ors
with
proo
f of v
alid
Con
tract
ors’
Lic
ense
, Wor
ker’s
Com
pens
atio
n an
dS
F Bu
sine
ss T
ax L
icen
se R
egis
tratio
n C
ertif
icat
e or
alre
ady
on D
BI C
ontra
ctor
s In
form
atio
n S
yste
m
Cus
tom
er S
ervi
ce
Fiel
d In
spec
tion
FIN
ISHO
nlin
e Pe
rmits
http
://w
ww
.sfg
ov.o
rgO
nlin
e S
ervi
ces
Info
rmat
ion
on C
PB
dat
abas
e.R
egis
ters
Onl
ine
Rec
eive
sLo
g-in
/Pas
swor
dAp
plie
s O
nlin
e!
Rej
ect
Any
exp
ired
licen
ses,
Wor
kers
’ com
pens
atio
n,A
ctiv
e co
mpl
aint
s or
Not
ices
of V
iola
tion
onpr
oper
ty
Sta
te C
ontra
ctor
sLi
cens
e B
oard
City
Hal
lTa
x C
olle
ctor
s O
ffice
1 D
r. C
arlto
nG
oodl
ett P
lace
Wor
kers
Com
pens
atio
n
DB
I BID
/EID
/PID
1660
Mis
sion
Stre
et 3
rd fl
oor
DB
I CES
1650
Mis
sion
Stre
et, R
m31
2C
8:00
AM
–5:
00 P
MC
lerk
and
Sr.
Insp
ecto
rC
usto
mer
ssi
gn in
on
clip
boar
d/ca
llon
pho
nean
d w
ait t
o be
cal
led
(5-3
0 m
inut
es w
ait)
Req
uire
d if
ther
e ar
e an
y bu
ildin
g, e
lect
rical
,pl
umbi
ng,v
iola
tions
that
hav
e no
t bee
n ab
ated
.A
pplic
ants
mus
t cle
ar a
ny re
late
dvi
olat
ions
befo
re w
ith p
erm
it be
fore
sub
mitt
ing
any
othe
rpe
rmit
appl
icat
ions
fora
ny s
cope
of w
ork.
DB
I will
aba
te a
ny o
ld c
ases
that
are
not r
elat
edto
the
wor
k if
poss
ible
(Ex:
An
activ
e ca
se a
bout
ano
ise
com
plai
nt fr
om 1
996.
If D
BI a
ssur
es th
atno
ted
viol
atio
n is
no
long
era
conc
ern,
a S
r.In
spec
tor w
ill ab
ate
the
case
)A
cces
s an
yne
cess
ary
fees
(Sco
pe o
f wor
k x2
or
x9)
Sr.
Insp
ecto
r Sta
mp/
Sig
n if
issu
e is
reso
lved
and/
or n
ot re
quire
d (is
sues
not
rela
ted
to c
urre
ntap
plic
atio
n)
Ele
ctric
al P
erm
it fo
r Con
tract
ors:
C10
,C45
, D28
, D34
Plum
bing
Per
mit
for C
ontra
ctor
s:C
36, C
20
Con
tract
ors
info
rmat
ion
upda
ted
Upd
ate
Con
tract
orIn
form
atio
n
Plum
bing
Insp
ectio
n D
ivis
ion
1660
Mis
sion
St,
3rd F
loor
7:30
AM
–4:
00 P
MC
lerk
and
Sr.
Insp
ecto
rFo
rNew
, Ren
ewal
or A
men
dmen
tpe
rmits
don
e by
hom
eow
ners
ForS
how
er P
an P
erm
its fo
r B L
icen
sed
Con
tract
ors
only
.C
leric
al s
uppo
rt (1
424,
142
6,14
08)
chec
k pr
oper
ty p
rofil
e fo
rdet
ache
dS
FFD
and
occ
upan
cy o
f hom
eow
ner a
t pr
oper
tyS
peak
with
Insp
ecto
r(62
42) o
r Sr.
Insp
ecto
r(62
46) t
o ge
t an
appr
oval
.U
pon
appr
oval
, cle
rical
sup
port
will
proc
ess
the
perm
it.
Spe
ak w
ithIn
spec
tor
Unq
ualif
ied
Mus
t Hire
Lice
nsed
Con
tract
or
Qua
lifie
d to
issu
efo
r“O
wne
r’s P
erm
it”E
lect
rical
/ Pl
umbi
ngpe
rmits
issu
ed a
t 3rd
Flo
or E
lect
rical
Insp
ecto
rC
ount
er u
pon
appr
oval
by
insp
ecto
r.
Con
tract
or in
form
atio
n ex
pire
d in
DB
I dat
abas
e
December 2007 Page 38
C. OVER-THE-COUNTER WITHOUT PLANS
“As-Is” Mapping Issues:
• No tracking of customer. • Rechecking required at Station #2, causing bottlenecks. • Lack of proper screening if the application requires other agencies, resulting in more rechecks and rejected applications.
“To-Be” Mapping Narrative: 1. Registration or self-help kiosk, directed to Records or Initial Permit Review (IPR). No more than 60 seconds.
2. Help Desk is available for general questions and procedures for all categories listed below.
a. Obtaining records. b. Registration or self help kiosk (no more than 60 seconds), routed to records
station. c. Triage and recheck appointments, non-DBI submittals, records, applications
(example: Planning conditional use or variance applications). d. Registration or self help kiosk (no more than 60 seconds), routed to station.
3. IPR Permit Technician determines if application complies with OTC rule (less than
one hour of review per station), and determines routing to other disciplines at other stations as required. IPR Permit Technician determines initial fee valuation and sends customer to cashier for filing and plan review payment, prior to any plan review work being performed.
4. Customer returns with receipt from cashier to continue processing.
5. IPR determines if application needs to be routed to Planning Department, SFFD,
DPH or other disciplines (can call upon inspector/plans examiner to review if simple sign-off required).
If not, IPR Permit Technician handles all other functions (including DPW-BSM). If Planning Department review is required, then this station is always the first station that the customer visits via the automated customer tracking system. If the Planning Department rejects the submittal or if it requires additional information, customer returns with necessary additional information, signs in at registration and proceeds via the automated customer tracking system directly to the Planning Department station.
If routing is required to the SFFD, DPH or another discipline after Planning
Department, customer visits these stations via the automated customer tracking system. If any discipline rejects the submittal or if it requires additional information, customer returns with necessary additional information, signs in at registration and proceeds via the automated customer tracking system directly to the appropriate station for final sign- off.
December 2007 Page 39
Once all approvals have been obtained, customer proceeds to Permit Issuance Station.
6. IPR Permit Technician performs all other tasks listed in this Report Section III B,
“Department of Building Inspection: Permit Center, Station 2” and determines final plan review valuation and sends customer to cashier for final fee payment to obtain permit and job card.
a. To ensure early tracking of SFPUC wastewater/water capacity charges, drawings must include information such as square footage, fixture count, etc. for all permit applications.
8:00
AM
–3:
45P
MC
alls
out n
umbe
rfor
the
next
cust
omer
1408
Cle
rk, 6
331
Bui
ldin
gIn
spec
tor
Rev
iew
app
licat
ion
form
s fo
rco
mpl
eten
ess
Che
ck fo
r DB
I vio
latio
ns, P
lann
ing
His
toric
alsi
gnifi
canc
e, B
lock
and
Lo
t inf
orm
atio
n on
Div
isio
nA
pplic
atio
ns –
Per
mit
Trac
king
Sys
tem
Det
erm
ine
rout
ing
requ
irem
ents
Est
ablis
h fo
rm ty
pe (
Form
3 o
rFo
rm 8
)S
tam
p Le
ad F
ee if
requ
ired
Pro
vide
final
sta
mp/
sign
-off
afte
r all
requ
ired
disc
iplin
es h
ave
sign
ed
8:00
AM
–5:
00 P
MTa
ke a
num
ber (
5 –
60 m
in.w
ait)
Che
ck if
pla
nnin
g ap
prov
alis
nec
essa
ryV
erify
pro
perty
info
on
Pla
nnin
g D
epar
tmen
tda
taba
seIf
hist
oric
al, c
usto
mer
mus
t tal
k to
a h
isto
rical
pres
erva
tioni
st –
his
toric
al p
rese
rvat
ioni
sts
are
only
at th
e co
unte
r 2.5
hou
rs p
er d
ayC
heck
BB
N, P
lann
ing
viol
atio
n, ½
fee,
etc
.V
erify
rout
ing
If O
K, s
tam
p w
ith fe
e st
amp
on fr
ont o
f per
mit
appl
icat
ion
form
,sig
n ba
ck o
f app
licat
ion
form
DB
I Pub
licIn
form
atio
nC
ount
er (1
st F
loor
)
Sta
rt
New
Cus
tom
ers
or th
ose
that
may
be
unfa
milia
r w
ithth
e pr
oces
s
DB
IOTC
No
Pla
nsC
ount
er R
evie
w (1
st F
loor
Sta
tion
2)
DB
IC
entra
l Per
mit
Bur
eau
Freq
uent
or E
xper
ienc
edC
usto
mer
sA
pplic
ant t
akes
a n
umbe
r
Pla
nnin
g D
epar
tmen
tIn
form
atio
n C
ount
er(P
IC)
(1st F
loor
Sta
tion
1)
DP
W-B
SM
(1st F
loor
, Sta
tion
#4)
SFF
D(4
th F
loor
)
DB
I Hou
sing
Insp
ectio
nS
ervi
ces
(6th F
loor
)
DB
I Mec
hani
cal P
lan
Rev
iew
(4th F
loor
)
DB
I B
ID/P
ID/E
ID (3
rd fl
oor)
orD
BI C
ES
(165
0 M
issi
on S
t. 3rd
floo
r,R
m. 3
12C
) dep
endi
ng o
nC
ompl
aint
Cas
e st
atus
SFR
A1
Sout
hV
an N
ess
DB
I Vio
latio
n no
t aba
ted
Dire
cts
cust
omer
s to
app
ropr
iate
sta
tions
– ta
ke a
num
bera
t Sta
tion
2 an
d w
ait
1424
Cle
rk,1
426
Sen
ior C
lerk
, 184
0 Jr
. Man
agem
ent A
ssis
tant
Ifsc
ope
of w
ork
need
s P
lann
ing
Dep
artm
ent r
evie
w, t
ells
cus
tom
erto
take
a n
umbe
r at P
lann
ing
as w
ell i
f the
re is
a lo
ng w
ait
Dire
cts
cust
omer
s to
app
ropr
iate
app
licat
ion
form
sH
elps
cus
tom
ers
with
filli
ng o
ut th
e fo
rms
Scop
es o
f Wor
ks a
t Sta
tion
2D
ry ro
t rep
air.
Term
ite re
port
is o
ptio
nal.
Mus
t ide
ntify
are
aan
d lo
catio
nR
e-ro
ofin
g ex
cept
coo
l roo
fW
indo
w re
plac
emen
tG
arag
e do
or re
plac
emen
t (sa
me
size
)N
on S
truct
ural
kitc
hen
and
bath
rem
odel
Rep
lace
/repa
ir si
ding
,stu
cco
Cha
ngin
g w
alls
(Non
-rat
ed) f
rom
stu
cco
to s
idin
gor
vic
e ve
rsa
(pic
ture
s ar
e re
quire
d by
Pla
nnin
g D
epar
tmen
t)In
stal
latio
n of
anc
hor b
olts
and
ply
woo
dpa
nels
on
the
grou
nd fl
oor o
rre
side
ntia
l bui
ldin
gsN
otic
e of
Vio
latio
n co
mpl
ianc
e w
ithou
tpla
ns
8:00
AM
–5:
00 P
MA
pplic
antu
ses
the
in-h
ouse
pho
ne a
nd c
alls
8-6
060
to b
e as
sist
edD
PW
-BS
M s
taff
com
es c
omes
from
beh
ind
the
wal
l (th
eir w
ork
cubi
cal)
to th
eP
erm
it St
atio
n 4
Rev
iew
s st
reet
spa
ce u
se is
nec
essa
ry(n
umbe
r of f
eet,
curb
cut
, stre
et b
lock
age,
etc.
)A
pply
for s
treet
spa
ce p
erm
it –
give
s ap
plic
ant a
noth
er fo
rm w
hich
they
nee
dto
fax
to D
PW-B
SM
on
875
Ste
vens
on S
treet
to a
ctiv
ate
8:00
AM
–5:
00 P
MS
ign
in o
n th
e cl
ipbo
ard
and
wai
t to
be
calle
dR
evie
w a
pplic
atio
n fo
rSFF
D c
ode
com
plia
nce
Sta
mp/
Sig
n ap
plic
atio
nC
ompl
ete
Fire
insp
ectio
n fo
rmIf
OK
, sta
mp
with
fee
stam
p on
fron
t of
perm
it ap
plic
atio
nfo
rm, s
ign
back
of
appl
icat
ion
form
8:00
AM
–5:
00 P
MD
rop
in w
ith 1
424,
142
6 cl
eric
al s
taff
Ver
ifica
tion
for 3
+ un
it bu
ildin
g(R
-1)
Che
ck fo
r act
ive
com
plai
nt c
ases
Res
olve
any
hou
sing
rela
ted
viol
atio
nsS
r. H
ousi
ng In
spec
tor s
igns
app
licat
ion
and
any
refe
renc
edo
cum
ents
If O
K, s
tam
p w
ith fe
e st
amp
on fr
ont o
f per
mit
appl
icat
ion
form
,si
gn b
ack
of a
pplic
atio
n fo
rm
If re
quire
d fo
r Mec
hani
cal r
evie
wSt
amp/
Sig
n ap
plic
atio
n52
03, 5
241,
520
5 M
echa
nica
lEn
gine
ers
If O
K, s
tam
p w
ith fe
e st
amp
on fr
ont
of p
erm
it ap
plic
atio
n fo
rm, s
ign
back
of a
pplic
atio
n fo
rm
If re
quire
dfo
r SFR
A re
view
Sta
mp/
Sig
n ap
plic
atio
nIf
OK
, sta
mp
with
fee
stam
pon
front
of p
erm
itap
plic
atio
n fo
rm,
sign
bac
k of
app
licat
ion
form
8:00
AM
–5:
00 P
MC
lerk
and
Sr.
Bui
ldin
g In
spec
tor
Cus
tom
ers
sign
in o
n cl
ipbo
ard
and
wai
tto
be
calle
d (5
-30
min
utes
wai
t)C
usto
mer
mus
t cal
l ins
pect
or o
nte
leph
one
if no
cle
rkis
at t
he d
esk
Req
uire
d if
ther
e ar
e an
y bu
ildin
gel
ectri
cal,
plum
bing
, vio
latio
ns th
at h
ave
not b
een
abat
edA
pplic
ants
mus
t cle
ar a
ny re
late
dvi
olat
ions
bef
ore
with
perm
it be
fore
subm
ittin
g an
y ot
her p
erm
itap
plic
atio
nsfo
r any
sco
pe o
f wor
kD
BI w
illab
ate
any
old
case
s th
at a
re n
otre
late
d to
the
wor
k if
poss
ible
(Exa
mpl
e:A
n ac
tive
case
con
cern
ing
a no
ise
com
plai
nt fr
om 1
996.
If D
BI a
ssur
es th
atno
ted
viol
atio
n is
no
long
er a
con
cern
, a
Sr.
Bui
ldin
g In
spec
tor w
ill ab
ate
the
case
)A
cces
s an
y ne
cess
ary
fees
(Sco
pe o
fw
ork
x2 o
r x9)
Sr.
Bui
ldin
g In
spec
tor S
tam
p/S
ign
if is
sue
isre
solv
ed a
nd/o
r not
requ
ired
(issu
esno
t rel
ated
to c
urre
ntap
plic
atio
n)
Fini
sh
Aug
ust 0
1, 2
007
BPR
– P
lan
Rev
iew
and
Per
mit
Issu
ance
Sub
com
mitt
eeA
s-Is
Map
ping
: Ove
r-Th
e-C
ount
er (O
TC) W
ithou
t Pla
ns
Ret
urn
to S
taio
n 2
for s
ign
off
Nee
ds P
lann
ing
Dep
artm
ent R
evie
w
No Planning DepartmentReview
Next Station per Routing Slip
REJ
ECT
REJ
ECT
REJ
ECT
REJ
ECT
REJ
ECT
REJ
ECT
REJ
ECT
REJ
ECT
Ret
urn
to S
tatio
n 2
for s
ign
off
No
othe
r rev
iew
,Si
gn o
ff
REJ
ECT
Returnto Station 2 for sign off
Dec
embe
r 200
7
BPR
– P
lan
Rev
iew
and
Per
mit
Issu
ance
Sub
com
mitt
ee T
o-B
e M
appi
ng:
Ove
r-Th
e-C
ount
er (O
TC) W
ithou
t Pla
ns
REG
ISTR
ATI
ON
Che
ck in
Aut
omat
ed c
usto
mer
track
ing
syst
em s
ends
to
next
sta
tion
(60
seco
nds
orle
ss)
REC
OR
DS
May
be
orde
red
onlin
e
KIO
SK
Sel
f che
ck-in
Aut
omat
ed c
usto
mer
track
ing
syst
em s
ends
to
next
sta
tion
(60
seco
nds
orle
ss)
PAY
FE
E@
CA
SHIE
R
INIT
IAL
PER
MIT
REV
IEW
(IPR
)
Nam
e ca
lled
via
auto
mat
edcu
stom
er tr
acki
ng s
yste
mE
stab
lish
appr
oval
disc
iplin
esA
ssis
t with
dat
a en
try fo
r per
mit
appl
icat
ion,
if n
eces
sary
Det
erm
ine
cust
omer
rout
ing
Che
ck fo
r com
plet
enes
sC
heck
Hou
sing
sta
tus
Che
ck fo
rNot
ice
ofVi
olat
ions
(NO
V)C
heck
blo
ck a
nd lo
t/add
ress
Add
add
ress
to P
erm
it Tr
acki
ngS
yste
m (P
TS),
if ne
cess
ary
Che
ck o
ccup
ancy
cla
ss, u
seD
eter
min
e fe
e va
luat
ions
Che
ck a
ppro
val o
f Gre
en R
ecyc
ling
Prog
ram
Che
ckB
usin
ess
Tax
regi
stra
tion,
Wor
kers
com
pens
atio
n,co
ntra
ctor
info
,etc
.D
PW-B
SMpr
elim
inar
y re
view
PER
MIT
ISSU
AN
CE
STA
TIO
N
Rev
iew
and
app
rove
per
mits
:D
ry ro
trep
air
Re-
roof
ing
exce
pt c
ool r
oof
Win
dow
repl
acem
ent (
Plan
ning
Dep
artm
entf
irst)
Sam
esi
ze g
arag
e do
or re
plac
emen
tN
on-s
truct
ural
kitc
hen
and
bath
rem
odel
Rep
lace
/repa
ir si
ding
stuc
coC
hang
ing
exte
rior w
all m
ater
ial
(Pla
nnin
g D
epar
tmen
t firs
t)A
ncho
r bol
ts/p
lyw
ood
at g
roun
d flo
or–
resi
dent
ial b
uild
ings
Not
ice
of V
iola
tion
(NO
V)
com
plia
nce
HEA
LTH
DEP
AR
TMEN
T
Nam
e ca
lled
via
auto
mat
ed c
usto
mer
track
ing
syst
em1
Hou
r max
imum
PLA
NN
ING
DEP
AR
TMEN
T
Nam
e ca
lled
via
auto
mat
ed c
usto
mer
track
ing
syst
em
PAY
FE
E@
CA
SHIE
R
FIN
ISH
FIN
ISH
App
rove
d by
Plan
ning
Dep
artm
ent
Nam
e ca
lled
via
auto
mat
ed c
usto
mer
trac
king
sys
tem
automated customertracking systemsendsnameto next station
ISSU
E PE
RM
ITan
d JO
B C
AR
D
App
rove
d
FREQ
UEN
TC
UST
OM
ERS
ALL
CU
STO
MER
S
Yes,
ifre
ques
ted
Pay
revi
ew fe
e
Ret
urn
with
rece
ipt
Ret
urn
with
rece
ipt t
o co
llect
draw
ings
Paym
ent f
orre
prod
uctio
nsre
quire
d?
YES
Yes,
ifre
ques
ted
OB
TAIN
INFO
RM
ATI
ON
OR
AB
ATE
VIO
LATI
ON
S
NO
STA
RT
Fill
oute
lect
roni
cap
plic
atio
non
line
or a
tP
erm
it C
ente
rif
able
atc
usto
mer
area
IsPl
anni
ngD
epar
tmen
tre
quire
d?
NO
App
rove
d
SFFD
Nam
e ca
lled
via
auto
mat
edcu
stom
er tr
acki
ngsy
stem
1 H
our m
axim
um
Mor
est
atio
ns?
NO
YES
YES
Mor
e st
atio
ns?
HEL
P D
ESK
Cod
e qu
estio
nsP
roce
ss q
uest
ions
Pol
icie
s an
d pr
oced
ures
Per
mit
hist
ory
requ
ired?
Per
mit
hist
ory
requ
ired?
NO
Proc
eed
to IP
R
NO
Rej
ect /
Fu
rthe
rin
fone
eded
Oth
erD
isci
plin
es
CU
STO
MER
TO
GO
DIR
ECTL
Y TO
REV
IEW
DIS
CIP
LIN
ES A
FTER
REG
ISTR
ATI
ON
Rej
ect /
Fu
rthe
rin
fone
eded
Rej
ect /
Fu
rthe
rin
fone
eded
Rej
ect /
Fu
rthe
rin
fone
eded
App
rove
d
App
rove
d
YES
December 2007 Page 42
D. OVER-THE-COUNTER WITH PLANS
“As-Is” Mapping Issues: • No tracking of customer; wait times vary. Bottlenecks occur. • Not all agencies are in close proximity of each other; some agencies are not adequately represented at the Permit Center. • Lack of proper screening until the specific station reviews the project, resulting in the need for more rechecks and rejected applications.
“To-Be” Mapping Narrative:
1. Registration or self-help kiosk, directed to Records or IPR (Initial Permit Review). No more than 60 seconds.
2. Help Desk is available for general questions and procedures for all categories listed below.
a. Obtaining records. b. Registration or self help kiosk (no more than 60 seconds), routed to records
station. c. Triage and recheck appointments, non-DBI submittals, records, applications
(example: Planning conditional use or variance applications). d. Registration or self help kiosk (no more than 60 seconds), routed to station.
2. IPR Permit Technician determines if application requires routing to Planning
Department. If routing is required to Planning Department, this station is always the first station the customer visits via the automated customer tracking system. If the Planning Department rejects the submittal, or if it requires additional information, the customer returns with necessary information, signs in at Registration and proceeds via the automated customer tracking system directly to the Planning Department station for final sign-off.
3. IPR Permit Technician determines if application complies with OTC rule (less than
one hour of review per station). If it does not comply, customer proceeds to submit application under “Addendum Submittal” process.
If it does comply, IPR Permit Technician determines if routing required to
disciplines at other stations. Permit Technician determines fee valuation and sends customer to cashier for filing and plan review fee payment, prior to any plan review work being performed.
5. Customer returns with receipt from cashier to continue processing.
6. If IPR Permit Technician determines application needs to be routed to other
disciplines, Technician can call upon inspector/plans examiner from other stations to review if simple sign-off is required. If no other disciplines are required to review application and drawings, IPR Permit Technician handles all other functions (including DPW-BSM in some cases).
December 2007 Page 43
7. IPR Permit Technician performs all other tasks listed in this Report Section III B, “Department of Building Inspection: Permit Center, Station 2.” If no other stations are required to review the application and drawings, IPR Permit Technician determines final plan review valuation and sends customer to cashier for final fee payment and to obtain permit and job card. While customer pays fee, Permit Technician stamps drawings. Customer returns with permit, job card and receipt from cashier and collects drawings.
a. To ensure early tracking of SFPUC wastewater/water capacity charges, drawings must include information such as square footage, fixture count, etc. for all permit applications.
8. If other stations need to review application and drawings, IPR Permit Technician
determines routing and sends customer to next station.
9. If other stations need to review application and drawings, customer carries drawings to each station for approvals. If corrections are needed, customer returns with corrections via a recheck appointment. If no corrections are needed, customer proceeds to permit issuance station.
10. Customer is responsible for collating drawings to make two approved sets. IPR
Permit Technician at Permit Issuance Station verifies that all stations have approved the drawings.
11. IPR Permit Technician at Permit Issuance Station determines final plan review
valuation and sends customer to cashier for final fee payment and to obtain permit and job card. While customer pays fee, Permit Technician stamps drawings. Customer returns with permit, job card and receipt from cashier and collects drawings.
8:00
AM
–3:
45P
MC
alls
out n
umbe
rfor
the
next
cus
tom
er.
1408
Cle
rk, w
ait1
0-20
min
utes
8:00
AM
–5:
00 P
MTa
ke a
num
ber (
5 –
60 m
in. w
ait)
Che
ck if
Pla
nnin
g D
epar
tmen
tapp
rova
lis
nece
ssar
yV
erify
pro
perty
info
on
Pla
nnin
g D
epar
tmen
t dat
abas
eIf
hist
oric
al, c
usto
mer
mus
t tal
kto
a h
isto
rical
pres
erva
tioni
st –
his
toric
al p
rese
rvat
ioni
sts
are
only
at t
he
coun
ter 2
.5 h
ours
per
day
Che
ckB
BN
, Pla
nnin
g vi
olat
ion,
½ fe
e,et
c.V
erify
rout
ing
If O
K, s
tam
pw
ith fe
e st
amp
on fr
ont o
f per
mit
appl
icat
ion
form
, sig
nba
ck o
f app
licat
ion
form
Sta
rt
New
Cus
tom
ers
or th
ose
that
may
be
unfa
milia
r w
ithth
e pr
oces
s.
DB
I Int
ake
Cou
nter
Sr.
Pla
nR
evie
w S
taff
1660
Mis
sion
St.
4th F
loor
DB
IC
entra
l Per
mit
Bur
eau
Freq
uent
or E
xper
ienc
edC
usto
mer
sA
pplic
ant s
igns
in
Pla
nnin
g D
epar
tmen
tIn
form
atio
n C
ount
er(P
IC)
(1st F
loor
Sta
tion
1)
DPW
-B
SM
(1st F
loor
, Sta
tion
#4)
SFF
D(4
th F
loor
)
DB
I Hou
sing
Insp
ectio
nS
ervi
ces
(6th F
loor
)
DBI
Mec
hani
cal P
lan
Rev
iew
(4th F
loor
)
DB
IB
ID/P
ID/E
ID (3
rd fl
oor)
or
DB
I CE
S(1
650
Mis
sion
St.
3rd fl
oor,
Rm
. 312
C) d
epen
ding
on
Com
plai
nt C
ase
stat
us
SFR
A1
Sou
th V
an N
ess
DB
I Vio
latio
n no
t aba
ted
Dire
cts
cust
omer
sto
appr
opria
test
atio
ns14
24 C
lerk
, 142
6 S
enio
r Cle
rk,1
840
Jr. M
anag
emen
t Ass
ista
ntIf
scop
e of
wor
k ne
eds
Pla
nnin
gD
epar
tmen
t Rev
iew
, tel
ls c
usto
mer
to
take
a n
umbe
rat P
lann
ing
Dep
artm
ent
asw
ell i
f the
reis
a lo
ng w
ait
Dire
cts
cust
omer
sto
appr
opria
teap
plic
atio
n fo
rms
Hel
ps c
usto
mer
s w
ith fi
lling
out
the
form
s
8:00
AM
–5:
00 P
MAp
plic
ant u
ses
the
in-h
ouse
pho
ne a
ndca
lls 8
-606
0 to
be
assi
sted
DP
W-B
SM
sta
ff co
mes
com
es fr
om
behi
ndth
e w
all (
thei
r wor
k cu
bica
l)to
the
Perm
it S
tatio
n 4
Rev
iew
s st
reet
spa
ce u
se is
nec
essa
ry(n
umbe
r of f
eet,
curb
cut
, stre
etbl
ocka
ge, e
tc.)
Appl
y fo
r stre
et s
pace
per
mit
– gi
ves
appl
ican
t ano
ther
form
whi
ch th
ey n
eed
to fa
x to
DP
W-B
SM
on
875
Ste
vens
onSt
reet
to a
ctiv
ate.
8:00
AM
–5:
00 P
MS
ign
in o
n th
e cl
ipbo
ard
and
wai
tto
be
calle
dR
evie
w a
pplic
atio
n fo
r SFF
Dco
de c
ompl
ianc
eS
tam
p/S
ign
appl
icat
ion
Com
plet
e S
FFD
insp
ectio
n fo
rmIf
OK
, sta
mp
with
fee
stam
p on
front
of p
erm
it ap
plic
atio
n fo
rm,
sign
bac
k of
app
licat
ion
form
8:00
AM
–5:
00 P
MD
rop
in w
ith 1
424,
142
6 cl
eric
alst
aff
Ver
ifica
tion
for3
+ un
it bu
ildin
g (R
-1)
Che
ck fo
r act
ive
com
plai
ntca
ses
Res
olve
any
hou
sing
rela
ted
viol
atio
nsS
r. H
ousi
ngIn
spec
tor s
igns
appl
icat
ion
and
any
refe
renc
edo
cum
ents
If O
K, s
tam
p w
ith fe
e st
amp
on fr
ont
of p
erm
it ap
plic
atio
n fo
rm, s
ign
back
of a
pplic
atio
nfo
rm
If re
quire
d fo
rMec
hani
calr
evie
wS
tam
p/S
ign
appl
icat
ion
5203
, 524
1, 5
205
Mec
hani
cal
Eng
inee
rsIf
OK
, sta
mp
with
fee
stam
p on
front
of p
erm
it ap
plic
atio
n fo
rm,
sign
bac
k of
app
licat
ion
form
If re
quire
d fo
r SFR
A re
view
Stam
p/S
ign
appl
icat
ion
If O
K, s
tam
p w
ith fe
e st
amp
on fr
onto
f per
mit
appl
icat
ion
form
, sig
n ba
ck o
f app
licat
ion
form
8:00
AM
–5:
00 P
MC
lerk
and
Sr.
Bui
ldin
gIn
spec
tor
Cus
tom
ers
sign
in o
n cl
ipbo
ard
and
wai
t to
be c
alle
d(5
-30
min
utes
wai
t)C
usto
mer
mus
tcal
l ins
pect
oron
tele
phon
eif
no c
lerk
is a
tth
e de
skR
equi
red
ifth
ere
are
any
build
ing,
ele
ctric
al,p
lum
bing
,vi
olat
ions
that
hav
e no
t bee
nab
ated
App
lican
ts m
ust c
lear
any
rela
ted
viol
atio
ns b
efor
e w
ithpe
rmit
befo
re s
ubm
ittin
g an
y ot
her p
erm
it ap
plic
atio
ns fo
ran
y sc
ope
of w
ork
DB
I will
aba
te a
ny o
ld c
ases
th
at a
re n
ot re
late
d to
the
wor
kif
poss
ible
(Exa
mpl
e: A
n ac
tive
case
con
cern
ing
a no
ise
com
plai
nt fr
om 1
996.
If D
BI
assu
res
that
not
ed v
iola
tion
isno
long
er a
con
cern
, a S
r.B
uild
ing
Insp
ecto
r will
aba
teth
e ca
se)
Acc
ess
any
nece
ssar
y fe
es(S
cope
of w
ork
x2 o
r x9)
Sr.
Bui
ldin
g In
spec
tor S
tam
p/S
ign
if is
sue
isre
solv
ed a
nd/o
rno
t req
uire
d (is
sues
not
re
late
d to
cur
rent
app
licat
ion)
Fini
sh
Aug
ust 1
6, 2
007
BPR
– P
lan
Rev
iew
and
Per
mit
Issu
ance
Sub
com
mitt
ee A
s-Is
Map
ping
: Ove
r-Th
e-C
ount
er (O
TC) w
ith P
lans
Ret
urn
to S
tatio
n 2
for s
ign
off
Nee
ds P
lann
ing
Dep
artm
ent R
evie
w
No Planning DepartmentReview
Next Station per Routing Slip
Ret
urn
to S
tatio
n 2
for a
pplic
atio
n nu
mbe
r ass
ignm
ent
Return to Station #2 for sign off
No other review, Sign off
*App
licat
ion
reje
cted
by
the
stat
ion,
pe
ndin
g ad
ditio
nal
info
rmat
ion
requ
ired
or d
ue to
non
-cod
e co
mpl
ying
app
licat
ion
INTA
KE
CE
NTE
R“T
riage
”16
60 M
issi
onS
t.4th
Flo
or
8:00
AM
–3:
45P
MR
evie
w a
pplic
atio
nfo
rms
for
com
plet
enes
sC
heck
for D
BI v
iola
tions
, Pla
nnin
gH
isto
rical
sign
ifica
nce,
Blo
ck a
nd L
otin
form
atio
non
Div
isio
n A
pplic
atio
ns –
Per
mit
Trac
king
Sys
tem
(PTS
)D
eter
min
e ro
utin
gre
quire
men
tsE
stab
lish
form
type
(For
m 3
or 8
)S
tam
p Le
ad F
ee if
requ
ired
Pro
vide
final
sta
mp/
sign
-off
afte
r all
requ
ired
disc
iplin
es h
ave
sign
ed
DB
I Pla
n R
evie
w S
ervi
ces
(4th F
loor
)
8:00
AM
–5:
00P
MS
ign
in o
n th
e cl
ipbo
ard
and
wai
t to
be c
alle
dR
evie
w a
pplic
atio
nfo
r Bui
ldin
g co
deco
mpl
ianc
eS
tam
p/S
ign
appl
icat
ion
Com
plet
e SF
FD in
spec
tion
form
If O
K, s
tam
p w
ith fe
e st
amp
on fr
ont
of p
erm
it ap
plic
atio
n fo
rm, s
ign
back
of a
pplic
atio
n fo
rm.
Cha
nges
that
trig
gers
Plan
ning
Dep
artm
ent
revi
ew
Cha
nges
that
trig
gers
Plan
ning
Dep
artm
ent
revi
ew
Cha
nges
that
trig
gers
Plan
ning
Dep
artm
ent
revi
ew
Cha
nges
that
trig
gers
Plan
ning
Dep
artm
ent
revi
ew
Cha
nges
that
trig
gers
Plan
ning
Dep
artm
ent
revi
ew
Cha
nges
that
trig
gers
Plan
ning
Dep
artm
ent
revi
ew
Pla
nnin
g D
epar
tmen
t/Cle
rk16
50 M
issi
onS
t., 4
th F
loor
DBI
/Inta
ke c
alla
pplic
ant t
ore
turn
Can
not O
TC
App
lican
t brin
gs b
ack
& fin
ish
per r
outin
gsl
ip
Applicant brings it to Planner
DB
I IN
FO C
OU
NTE
R
Dec
embe
r 200
7
BPR
– P
lan
Rev
iew
and
Per
mit
Issu
ance
Sub
com
mitt
ee T
o-B
e M
appi
ng: O
ver-
The-
Cou
nter
(OTC
) With
Pla
ns
PAY
FE
E@
CA
SHIE
R
INIT
IAL
PER
MIT
REV
IEW
(IPR
)
Nam
e ca
lled
via
Aut
omat
edcu
stom
er tr
acki
ng s
yste
mE
stab
lish
appr
oval
dis
cipl
ines
Det
erm
ine
cust
omer
rout
ing
Che
ck fo
r com
plet
enes
sC
heck
Hou
sing
stat
usC
heck
for N
otic
e of
Vio
latio
ns(N
OV
)C
heck
for b
lock
and
lot/a
ddre
ssA
dd a
ddre
ss to
Per
mit
Trac
king
Sys
tem
(PTS
), if
nece
ssar
yC
heck
occ
upan
cy c
lass
,use
Det
erm
ine
fee
eval
uatio
nsC
heck
app
rova
l ofG
reen
Rec
yclin
g Pr
ogra
mC
heck
Bus
ines
s Ta
xR
egis
tratio
n,W
orke
rsC
ompe
nsat
ion,
cont
ract
orin
fo, e
tc.
DPW
-BSM
prel
imin
ary
revi
ewC
heck
if h
isto
ric re
sour
ceC
heck
if C
ondi
tiona
l-Use
(CU
)ap
plic
atio
nSF
FD p
relim
inar
y re
view
PER
MIT
ISSU
AN
CE
STA
TIO
N
Che
cks
draw
ings
to m
ake
sure
all
sign
offs
com
plet
eD
eter
min
es fi
nalv
alua
tion
and
fees
Sen
ds c
usto
mer
to C
ashi
er w
hile
draw
ings
are
sta
mpe
d A
ppro
ved
PAY
FE
E@
CA
SHIE
R
FIN
ISHISSU
E PE
RM
ITan
d JO
B C
AR
D
App
rove
d
Pay
Rev
iew
Fee
Ret
urn
with
Rec
eipt
Ret
urn
with
rece
ipt t
o co
llect
draw
ings
.
Paym
ent f
orre
prod
uctio
nsre
quire
d?YE
SYe
s, if
requ
este
dR
ecor
ds?
OB
TAIN
INFO
RM
ATI
ON
, OR
AB
ATE
VIO
LATI
ON
S
PLA
NN
ING
DEP
AR
TMEN
T
Nam
e ca
lled
via
Aut
omat
ed c
usto
mer
track
ing
syst
em
DB
I Str
uctu
ral
Plan
Rev
iew
MEC
HA
NIC
AL
SFFD
DPW
-B
SM
DPH
SFR
A
SFPU
C
App
lican
t col
late
sdr
awin
gs to
pro
vide
final
app
rove
d se
ts
May be rejected if not code compliantIf changesrequired, correction sheet provided to customer, applicant returns withcorrections to any staff covering the discipline.If OTC not complete, may re-register next day without IPR
Ret
urn
to p
ick
up
appr
oved
sta
mpe
ddr
awin
gs
NO
APP
RO
VED
by
Plan
ning
Dep
artm
ent
APPLICANT CARRIES DRAWINGS TO EACHSTATIONS DETERMINED BYIPRROUTING
NO
TE:
All
stat
ions
:C
usto
mer
cal
led
via
Aut
omat
edcu
stom
er tr
acki
ngsy
stem
1 H
our m
axim
umA
ppro
vals
ent
ered
into
PTS
MO
D
IsPl
anni
ngD
epar
tmen
tre
quire
d?
Mor
e st
atio
ns?
YES
YES
HEL
P D
ESK
Cod
e qu
estio
nsPr
oces
s qu
estio
nsPo
licie
s an
d pr
oced
ures
Rej
ect /
Fu
rthe
rin
fone
eded
Rej
ect /
Fu
rthe
rin
fone
eded
IPR
sta
ffde
term
ines
ifO
TC?
NO
Go
to “T
o-B
e”m
appi
ng fo
rA
dden
dum
subm
ittal
YES
CU
STO
MER
TO
GO
DIR
ECTL
Y TO
REV
IEW
DIS
CIP
LIN
ES A
FTER
REG
ISTR
ATI
ON
REG
ISTR
ATI
ON
Che
ck in
Aut
omat
ed c
usto
mer
track
ing
syst
emse
nds
tone
xt s
tatio
n(6
0 se
cond
sor
less
)
REC
OR
DS
May
be
orde
red
onlin
e
KIO
SK
Sel
f che
ck-in
Aut
omat
ed c
usto
mer
track
ing
syst
emse
nds
tone
xt s
tatio
n(6
0 se
cond
sor
less
)
FIN
ISH
FREQ
UEN
T C
UST
OM
ERS
ALL
CU
STO
MER
S
STA
RT
Fill
out
elec
troni
cap
plic
atio
non
line
or a
tP
erm
it C
ente
rif
able
at c
usto
mer
area
Per
mit
hist
ory
requ
ired?
Per
mit
hist
ory
Req
uire
d?N
O
Proc
eed
to IP
R
NO
NO
Yes,
if
requ
este
d
Yes,
ifre
ques
ted
December 2007 Page 46
E. RESIDENTIAL ALTERATIONS/ADDITIONS – SITE PERMIT
“As-Is” Mapping Issues:
• No tracking of customer; wait times vary. Bottlenecks occur and some fees are lost. • Double checking of documents. • Limited screening of application materials. • Limited tracking of drawings. • No guaranteed turnaround times. • Limited hours for some staff reviews. • Limited coordination of public notification between DBI and other agencies. • Too many forms.
“To-Be” Mapping Narrative:
1. Registration or self-help kiosk, directed to Initial Permit Review (IPR). No more than 60 seconds.
2. Help desk is available for general questions and procedures for all categories listed
below.
a. Obtaining records. b. Registration or self help kiosk (no more than 60 seconds), routed to records
station. c. Triage and recheck appointments, non-DBI submittals, records, applications
(example: Planning conditional use or variance applications). d. Registration or self help kiosk (no more than 60 seconds), routed to station.
3. Pre-application (voluntary) coordination conference with DBI, Planning Department,
DPW-BSM, SFPUC, SFFD, SFRA, etc. (for a fee), to address specific questions regarding code interpretations, prior to submitting the application. Written determinations are to be provided by all participating agencies.
4. IPR Permit Technician determines fee valuation and sends customer to cashier for
filing and plan review fee payment, prior to any work being performed. 5. Cursory plan check at IPR is to be increased to capture more code issues during
initial plan review. a. To ensure early tracking of SFPUC wastewater/water capacity charges, drawings
must include information such as square footage, fixture count, etc. for all permit applications.
b. If project falls within SFFD jurisdiction, preliminary review is required by the SFFD.
6. Planning Department staff (or SFRA, if in its jurisdiction) is to make initial
determination on actual approvals during initial plan review, to determine if project may even proceed.
December 2007 Page 47
a. Planning Department staff or IPR Permit Technician to determine if eviction is part of this work, resulting in project being put on hold, pending outcome.
7. Customer returns with receipt from cashier to continue processing. 8. IPR Permit Technician performs all other tasks listed in this Report Section III, B“,
Department of Building Inspection: Permit Center, Station 2.”
9. Use Radio Frequency Identification (RFID) codes (the San Francisco Library just did this). Use RFID codes to automate the tracking of plans.
10. Application and drawings are routed to Planning Department for discretionary
review process. 11. Planning Department “log-in” of workload and assignment to reviewer. Use PTS to
automate. Email sent to customer to identify Planner and sent to DBI to estimate turnaround time. a. After discretionary review process is completed, Planning Department approved
plans sent to DBI within one business day. b. Application has limited review by DBI and SFFD for site permit issues only. If
application requires changes prior to site permit approval, notification is made to IPR Permit Technician. Customer is notified by IPR Permit Technician via email and mail. Customer retrieves plans, makes necessary changes or provides additional information. Recheck appointment is scheduled with DBI or SFFD for site permit issues sign-off.
c. If DBI and SFFD approve for site permit issues, application proceeds to Processing Station. Customer notified via email and mail, maybe full set of plans or site permit approval only, customer is responsible for next action.
12. Options for customer for site permit and full submittal approvals:
a. Site permit approval OTC (Customer requests after discretionary process at Planning Department or SFRA). Starts the clock for 15 calendar days appeal process. Customer picks up drawings and application at Processing Station and proceeds with approval process.
b. Site permit submittal allows for initial review by Planning Department or SFRA, without expending fees for the structural addendum.
c. Site permit plus addenda/full permit review over-the-counter (after discretionary review process at Planning Department or SFRA, for smaller horizontal additions where full seismic upgrade may not be required). Customer notified by email, depending upon DBI capacity to perform these tasks over-the-counter.
d. Full permit review submittal allows for either split submittal for site permit or for full submittal of site permit and structural addendum.
13. If customer is submitting full sets of submittal drawings, IPR Permit
Technician determines routing to other disciplines. (Can call upon inspector/plans examiner of other stations to review if simple sign-off required). If customer is submitting site permit set, Planning Department staff reviews submittal at IPR station for completeness.
8:00
AM
–3:
45P
MC
usto
mer
sig
ns in
Sr.
Pla
n E
xam
iner
chec
ksfo
rco
mpl
eten
ess
May
con
sult
with
SFF
D, g
reat
erde
gree
of r
evie
w if
not
a s
itepe
rmit
Dev
elop
sR
outin
g on
Com
pute
r
8:00
AM
–5:
00 P
MTa
ke a
num
ber (
5 –
60 m
in. w
ait)
Che
ck e
ntitl
emen
tsV
erify
pro
perty
info
on P
lann
ing
Dep
artm
ent d
atab
ase
If hi
stor
ical
, cus
tom
er m
ust t
alk
to a
hist
oric
al p
rese
rvat
ioni
st–
hist
oric
alpr
eser
vatio
nist
s ar
e on
ly a
t the
coun
ter2
.5 h
ours
per
day
Che
ck B
BN
, Pla
nnin
g vi
olat
ion,
½ fe
e,et
c.Id
entif
y P
lann
er fo
rrou
ting
If ok
, ini
tial A
CC
EP
T on
rout
ing
slip
STA
RT
DB
I Int
ake
Cou
nter
1660
Mis
sion
St.
4th F
loor
Freq
uent
or E
xper
ienc
ed C
usto
mer
s w
ith F
orm
3/8
atta
ched
with
Pre
-App
licat
ion.
Lette
r,ot
herp
erm
it ap
prov
al c
ondi
tions
and
tree
disc
losu
re s
tate
men
t with
2se
ts o
f pla
ns.
Pla
nnin
g D
epar
tmen
tInf
orm
atio
nC
ount
er (P
IC)
(1st F
loor
Sta
tion
1)
DP
W -
BSM
(1st F
loor
, Sta
tion
4)
Aug
ust 0
9, 2
007
BPR
-Pl
an R
evie
w a
nd P
erm
it Is
suan
ce S
ubco
mm
ittee
As-
Is M
appi
ng: R
esid
entia
l Add
ition
– S
ite P
erm
it
Vol
unta
ryP
re A
pplic
atio
n P
hase
Man
dato
ry P
lann
ing
Dep
artm
ent
Pre
App
licat
ion
– N
eigh
borh
ood
Not
ifica
tion
Mee
ting
(Pol
icy,
not
Cod
e)
Pla
nnin
g D
epar
tmen
t16
50 M
issi
on S
t.4th
Flo
or
DB
I16
60 M
issi
on S
t.2nd
Flo
or
8:00
AM
–5:
00 P
MS
ubm
it ap
plic
atio
n fo
rmw
ith $
710
fee
Inta
ke b
ycl
erk,
giv
en to
qu
adra
nt2
wee
k w
aitf
orap
poin
tmen
t for
an
advi
sory
mee
ting
Not
hing
is w
ritte
n, b
ut th
eyca
n re
ques
tfor
a w
ritte
nle
tter o
f det
erm
inat
ion
from
the
Zoni
ngA
dmin
istra
tor
If no
t sat
isfie
d, h
ave
the
Zoni
ng A
dmin
istra
tor t
ow
rite
a le
tter a
nd th
e le
tter
can
be a
ppea
led
thro
ugh
Boa
rd o
f App
eals
8:00
AM
–5:
00 P
MS
ubm
it le
tter w
ithfe
eIn
clud
es S
FFD
,Bui
ldin
gE
ngin
eerin
g/M
echa
nica
l,et
c.P
RS
sta
ff re
view
s an
dde
cide
s w
ho s
houl
d at
tend
(DB
I, P
lann
ing
Dep
artm
ent,
SFF
D)
Pre
App
licat
ion
team
lead
er48
hou
rs to
arr
ange
mee
ting
10 d
ays
to c
ondu
ctm
eetin
gA
ccep
t fee
sfo
r age
ncie
sLe
tter o
f Det
erm
inat
ion
draf
ted
with
in 2
wee
ksLe
tter m
ay b
e ap
peal
edth
roug
h th
e ch
ain
of
com
man
d to
Dire
ctor
8:00
AM
–5:
00 P
MC
all 8
-606
0 fro
m h
ouse
pho
neR
evie
w fo
r com
plet
enes
sId
entif
y ot
her p
erm
its re
quire
d
DB
I Cen
tral P
erm
it B
urea
u(1
st F
loor
)
8:00
AM
–4:
30 P
MTa
ke a
num
ber a
nd w
ait
Cus
tom
er p
ays
plan
che
ckfe
esP
uts
inbi
n fo
r Pla
nnin
g D
epar
tmen
t pic
k up
Pla
nnin
g D
epar
tmen
t16
50 M
issi
on S
t.S
uite
400
Pla
nnin
g D
epar
tmen
t Cle
rk p
icks
up
plan
s ev
ery
day
CP
B lo
gs o
ut o
n P
erm
it Tr
acki
ng S
yste
mP
lann
ing
Dep
artm
ent l
ogs
in o
n P
erm
it Tr
acki
ng S
yste
mR
oute
to q
uadr
ant t
eam
lead
er w
ho a
lread
y ap
prov
edfro
m d
iscr
etio
nary
revi
ew/e
nviro
nmen
tal (
all b
efor
e su
bmitt
ing
to D
BI)
Add
s C
PZO
Con
rout
ing
fir fo
rinc
lusi
onar
y ho
usin
g pe
rmits
8:00
AM
–5:
00 P
M2-
3+ w
eeks
for a
ssig
nmen
t to
Pla
nner
,by
case
load
Rev
iew
by
Pla
nner
with
in 6
0 da
ys –
pro
ject
docu
men
ts c
ompl
ete,
add
ition
al m
ater
ials
or
corr
ectio
ns to
be
subm
itted
with
in 3
0 da
ys to
pla
nner
Pro
ject
gen
eral
ly “a
ppro
vabl
e”P
lann
er c
alls
app
lican
ttha
t311
Not
ifica
tion
is re
ady
to b
e m
aile
dD
iscr
etio
nary
Rev
iew
(DR
) and
oth
erdi
scre
tiona
ryac
tions
(20%
+/-)
take
long
erM
inim
um 4
-5 m
onth
s re
view
– if
DR
, lon
ger
Env
ironm
enta
l det
erm
inat
ion
bay
be a
ppea
led
toB
oard
of S
uper
viso
rS
igns
DB
I Pla
n R
evie
w S
ervi
ces
1660
Mis
sion
St.
2nd F
loor
Cle
rkde
liver
s to
DB
I
8:00
AM
–5:
00 P
MC
hief
Cle
rk g
ets
2 se
ts o
f sta
mpe
d pl
ans
and
othe
rdo
cum
ents
.Lo
gs in
on
Per
mit
Trac
king
Sys
tem
on
arriv
al d
ate
Put
s in
bac
kva
ult
Wor
kloa
d M
anag
er d
eter
min
es n
umbe
r of h
ours
for r
evie
wD
eter
min
es n
ext a
vaila
ble
Pla
n E
xam
iner
with
the
leas
tba
ck lo
g an
d ve
rifie
s ro
utin
g (u
sual
ly 2
wee
ks)
Cur
sory
revi
ew (n
otde
taile
dpl
ans)
Ifok
ay, s
tam
ps a
nd s
igns
Cal
lsap
plic
ant t
o su
bmit
addi
tiona
l set
s of
pla
ns p
er ro
utin
g
Cen
tral P
erm
it B
urea
u16
60 M
issi
on S
t., 1
st F
loor
Site
Per
mit
Issu
edw
ith n
o A
dden
dum
Sche
dule
$
$
$
Beg
inA
dden
dum
Subm
ittal
15 C
alen
dar D
ays
Appe
al P
erio
d(If
not
pur
suan
t to
Con
ditio
nalU
se)
Pla
nnin
g C
ode
Vio
latio
n A
bate
men
t
Applicant returns withadditional sets
YIE
LD App
lican
t may
chos
e to
wai
tfor
Adde
ndum
s to
be a
ppro
ved
befo
re is
suin
gth
e S
ite P
erm
it
Inco
mpl
ete
Mus
t ret
urn
Inco
mpl
ete
Mus
t ret
urn
Inco
mpl
ete
Mus
t ret
urn
SFF
D
Dec
embe
r 200
7
BPR
– P
lan
Rev
iew
and
Perm
itIs
suan
ceSu
bcom
mitt
ee T
o-B
e M
appi
ng:
Res
iden
tial A
ltera
tions
and
Add
ition
s –
Site
Per
mit
KIO
SK
Sel
f che
ck-in
Aut
omat
ed c
usto
mer
track
ing
syst
em s
ends
to
nex
t sta
tion
(60
seco
nds
or le
ss)
REC
OR
DS
May
be
requ
este
d on
line
REG
ISTR
ATI
ON
Che
ck-in
Auto
mat
ed c
usto
mer
track
ing
syst
em s
ends
to n
ext s
tatio
n(6
0se
cond
s or
less
)
HEL
P D
ESK
Cod
e qu
estio
nsPr
oces
s qu
estio
nsPo
licie
s an
d pr
oced
ures
SFR
A
As re
quire
dSt
aff r
evie
w p
roce
ssN
otifi
catio
nsC
omm
issi
on h
earin
gsAp
prov
als
Com
pare
with
pre
viou
sap
prov
als
PA
Y F
EE@
CA
SHIE
R
PA
Y F
EE@
CA
SHIE
R
INIT
IAL
PER
MIT
REV
IEW
(IP
R)
Nam
e ca
lled
via
Aut
omat
ed c
usto
mer
track
ing
syst
emEs
tabl
ish
appr
oval
dis
cipl
ines
Det
erm
ine
cust
omer
rout
ing
Che
ck fo
r com
plet
enes
sC
heck
Hou
sing
sta
tus
Che
ck fo
rNot
ice
of V
iola
tions
(NO
V)C
heck
for b
lock
and
lot/a
ddre
ssAd
d ad
dres
sto
Per
mit
Trac
king
Syst
em (P
TS),
if ne
cess
ary
Che
ck o
ccup
ancy
cla
ss, u
seD
eter
min
e fe
e ev
alua
tions
Che
ck a
ppro
val o
f Gre
en R
ecyc
ling
Prog
ram
Che
ckB
usin
ess
Tax
Reg
istra
tion,
Wor
kers
Com
pens
atio
n, c
ontr
acto
rin
form
atio
n, e
tc.
DPW
-BSM
prel
imin
ary
revi
ewC
heck
if h
isto
ric re
sour
ceC
heck
if C
ondi
tiona
l-Use
app
licat
ion
Plan
ning
Dep
artm
ent s
taff
revi
ew fo
rge
nera
l con
form
ance
, pho
tos,
pre
-ap
plic
atio
n, n
eigh
bor i
nfor
mat
ion,
etc
.In
take
and
forw
ard
revi
sion
s to
Pl
anni
ng D
epar
tmen
tEn
ter R
adio
Fre
quen
cyId
entif
icat
ion
(RFI
D) c
ode
to d
raw
ings
PRO
CES
SIN
G S
TATI
ON
Che
cks
draw
ings
to m
ake
sure
Plan
ning
Dep
artm
ent o
rSFR
A si
gns
off
Stam
ps d
raw
ings
Not
ify c
usto
mer
site
per
mit
is re
ady
Opt
ion
1: C
usto
mer
pic
ksup
pla
ns if
si
te p
erm
it is
not
requ
este
dO
ptio
n 2:
Site
per
mit
is re
ques
ted
Det
erm
ine
final
val
uatio
n an
d fe
es
Cus
tom
er s
uppl
ies
notif
icat
ion
list,
form
s,pa
ys fo
r or s
uppl
ies
enve
lope
s –
dual
DB
I and
Pl
anni
ng D
epar
tmen
tno
tific
atio
nPO
ST N
OTI
CE
Plan
ning
Dep
artm
ent
CLE
RK
proc
esse
sno
tific
atio
n m
ater
ials
Rej
ect /
Fu
rthe
rIn
fone
eded
PLA
NN
ING
DEP
AR
TMEN
T
Ent
er in
to P
erm
it Tr
acki
ng S
yste
m(P
TS) t
o qu
adra
nt le
ader
Qua
dran
t lea
der h
olds
unt
il as
sign
ed p
lann
er is
read
y to
revi
ewP
lann
ing
Dep
artm
ent h
ascl
erk
proc
ess
notif
icat
ion
mat
eria
ls a
fter
appr
oval
and
pla
ces
on 3
0-da
yho
ld o
nce
notic
e is
sen
t out
Max
imum
turn
arou
nd ti
me
excl
usiv
eof
hol
ds: 2
1 da
ysA
ppoi
ntm
ents
fors
ubm
ittin
gC
ondi
tiona
l-Use
, Var
ianc
e or
ME
Aap
plic
atio
ns to
the
Plan
ning
Dep
artm
ent D
epar
tmen
t with
in tw
ow
eeks
PLA
NN
ING
DEP
AR
TMEN
TC
OU
NTE
R
Ass
ists
with
app
licat
ion
form
sR
ecei
ves
paym
ent
Rev
iew
s su
bmitt
als
Ent
ers
info
into
Per
mit
Trac
king
Sys
tem
(PTS
)S
ets
cale
ndar
for
hear
ing
ALL
CU
STO
MER
S
FREQ
UEN
TC
UST
OM
ERS
Yes,
ifre
ques
ted
Yes,
ifre
ques
ted
OB
TAIN
INFO
RM
ATI
ON
OR
AB
ATE
VIO
LATI
ON
S
Paym
ent f
orre
prod
uctio
nre
quire
d?YE
SR
etur
n w
ith re
ceip
tto
col
lect
dra
win
gs
Pay
revi
ew fe
eR
etur
n w
ith re
ceip
t
App
rove
site
perm
it?YE
S
Issu
e pe
rmit.
Ret
urn
topi
ck u
p st
ampe
d dr
awin
gs
Proc
eed
to a
dden
da P
roce
ss w
hen
read
y
APP
RO
VED
Initi
alZo
ning
App
rova
l
PRO
VID
E A
DD
ITIO
NA
L IN
FOR
MA
TIO
N O
R R
EVIS
ION
S
STA
RT
Fill
out
elec
troni
cap
plic
atio
non
line
orat
Per
mit
Cen
ter i
f ab
le a
tcu
stom
er a
rea.
FIN
ISH
FIN
ISH
SFR
A
If re
quire
d pr
ior t
o su
bmitt
al
Lim
ited
Stru
ctur
al P
lan
Rev
iew
and
SFFD
revi
ew fo
r site
per
mit
only
TO P
LAN
NIN
GD
EPA
RTM
ENT
FOR
:
Dis
cret
iona
ry R
evie
wap
plic
atio
nC
ondi
tiona
l-Use
(CU
)by
app
oint
men
t.Va
rianc
e (b
yap
poin
tmen
t)R
ecor
dsG
ener
al in
form
atio
n
TO P
LAN
NIN
GD
EPA
RTM
ENT
FOR
:
Dis
cret
iona
ry R
evie
wap
plic
atio
nC
ondi
tiona
l-Use
(CU
) by
appo
intm
ent
Varia
nce
(by
appo
intm
ent)
Rec
ords
Gen
eral
info
rmat
ion
PLA
NN
ING
DEP
AR
TMEN
T R
EVIE
W O
NLY
Fina
lPla
nnin
gD
epar
tmen
tap
prov
al
Tran
sfer
with
inon
e bu
sine
ss d
ay
Rej
ect /
M
ore
info
need
ed
Rej
ect /
Fu
rthe
rIn
fone
eded
App
licat
ion,
subm
ittal
s, d
raw
ings
Ente
r int
o PT
S an
dtr
ansf
er to
Pla
nnin
gD
epar
tmen
t
Perm
it hi
stor
yre
quire
d?
Perm
it hi
stor
yre
quire
d?N
O
NO
PLA
NN
ING
DEP
AR
TMEN
T R
EVIE
W O
NLY
Publ
ic h
earin
g re
quire
d.Ap
prov
al, D
isap
prov
alor
Rev
isio
ns re
quire
d
PRO
VID
E R
EVIS
ION
S, IF
REQ
UIR
ED
December 2007 Page 50
F. RESIDENTIAL ALTERATIONS/ADDITIONS – ADDENDUM
“As-Is” Mapping Issues:
• Order of review by different agencies is uncertain. • Rechecking of documents between agencies; limited coordination between agencies. • Limited coordination of recheck appointments and collating drawings for final review. • Limited tracking of drawings. • No guaranteed turnaround times.
“To-Be” Mapping Narrative:
1. Full submittal sets, parallel plan review: customer is notified number of sets
required, based on routing. Customer brings copy of approved site permit.
a. IPR Permit Technician is responsible for checking for completeness of addendum submittal and that it matches approved site permit.
b. Turnaround times for first set of plan review comments after initial plan review to be within 10 business days for small projects, 20 business days for medium projects (See Performance Measures Subcommittee Report for specific project descriptions).
c. Recheck appointments to be scheduled with original plans examiner within three business days from day of request.
d. Customer to control rechecks with original plans examiner when ready for all disciplines.
2. Help Desk is available for general questions and procedures for all categories listed below.
a. Obtaining records. b. Registration or self help kiosk (no more than 60 seconds), routed to records
station. c. Triage and recheck appointments, non-DBI submittals, records, applications
(example: Planning conditional use or variance applications). d. Registration or self help kiosk (no more than 60 seconds), routed to station.
3. Customer responsible for obtaining sign-offs from each station and collating
drawings to make two approved sets. 4. Permit Technician at Permit Issuance Station verifies that all stations have
approved the drawings. 5. Permit Technician at Permit Issuance Station determines final plan review
valuation and sends customer to cashier for final fee payment and to obtain permit and job card. While applicant pays fee, Permit Technician stamps drawings. Customer returns with permit, job card and receipt from cashier and collects drawings.
8:00
AM
–3:
45 P
MC
usto
mer
sig
ns in
Sr.
Pla
nE
xam
iner
che
cks
for
com
plet
enes
s ba
sed
on w
hat y
our
subm
ittal
nee
ds –
nec
essa
rydo
cum
ents
,ref
eren
ce d
raw
ings
, cop
yof
Site
Per
mit
Pack
age
forE
AC
Had
dend
um w
ith n
umbe
r of s
ets
for
num
ber o
f sta
tions
.A
ttach
es A
dden
dum
car
d,V
erifi
es c
orre
ctro
utin
gS
tam
ps a
nd lo
gs in
to P
erm
it Tr
acki
ngS
yste
mA
pplic
ant s
igns
add
enda
car
dIf
appl
ican
t brin
gs le
ss s
ets
than
the
num
ber o
f sta
tions
,the
y ca
n br
ing
itla
ter
8:00
AM
–5:
00 P
MTa
ke a
num
ber (
5 –
60 m
in. w
ait)
Che
ck e
ntitl
emen
tsV
erify
pro
perty
info
on
Pla
nnin
gD
epar
tmen
t dat
abas
e.If
hist
oric
al, c
usto
mer
mus
t tal
k to
a
hist
oric
al p
rese
rvat
ioni
st –
his
toric
alpr
eser
vatio
nist
sar
e on
ly a
t the
cou
nter
2.5
hour
s pe
r day
.C
heck
BB
N,P
lann
ing
viol
atio
n,½
fee,
et
c.Id
entif
y Pl
anne
r for
rout
ing
If ok
, ini
tial A
CC
EPT
on ro
utin
g sl
ip
Juni
or S
itePe
rmit
Issu
ed
DB
I Int
ake
Cou
nter
1660
Mis
sion
St
4th F
loor
App
lican
t ret
urns
with
min
imum
2se
ts o
f pla
ns w
ith c
lear
ly m
arke
dco
ver s
heet
say
ing
wha
t the
yar
e su
bmitt
ing
for
Pla
nnin
g D
epar
tmen
tIn
form
atio
n C
ount
er (P
IC)
(1st
Floo
r Sta
tion
1)
Aug
ust 2
2, 2
007
BPR
-Pl
an R
evie
w a
nd P
erm
it Is
suan
ce S
ubco
mm
ittee
As-
Is M
appi
ng: R
esid
entia
l Add
ition
-A
dden
dum
If thereare changes to the SitePermit that impactPlanning Department, must be routedto Planning Department.
DB
I Pla
nR
evie
w S
ervi
ces
1660
Mis
sion
St.
2nd F
loor
Inte
rnal
Rou
ting
No
Cha
nges
to S
ite
8:00
AM
–4:
45 P
MA
rriv
es in
bac
kva
ult
Wor
kloa
dM
anag
er d
eter
min
es n
umbe
r of h
ours
for
revi
ewD
eter
min
es n
ext a
vaila
ble
Plan
Exa
min
erw
ith th
ele
ast b
ack
log
Ver
ifies
rout
ing
If ad
ditio
nal s
ets
are
need
ed,
Cal
lsap
plic
ant t
o su
bmit
per r
outin
g
DB
I Stru
ctur
al P
lan
Rev
iew
1660
Mis
sion
St.,
2nd
Flo
or
RE
CH
EC
K A
PP
OIN
TME
NT
Rec
heck
app
oint
men
t is
mad
e w
ithth
e st
aff
App
lican
t and
Pla
n E
xam
iner
mee
t and
go
over
pla
ns to
geth
erIf
okay
, Pla
n E
xam
iner
sta
mps
and
sig
ns o
ffIf
mor
e ch
ange
sne
ed to
be
mad
e, A
pplic
ant m
ust m
ake
chan
ges,
and
resc
hedu
lean
appo
intm
entt
o m
eet a
gain
If there aremajor changes,MUSTsubmit alternative Site Permit
DB
I Pla
n R
evie
w S
ervi
ces
staf
f ver
ifies
all
need
ed s
tam
psfro
m o
ther
div
isio
ns a
nd d
epar
tmen
ts.
WO
RK
UN
DE
RW
AY
DB
IPla
n R
evie
w S
ervi
ces
1660
Mis
sion
St.,
2nd
Flo
or
App
lican
t ret
urns
with
add
ition
al s
ets
No
resp
onse
Upo
n ex
pira
tion
date
,ap
plic
ant i
s se
nt a
w
arni
ng le
tter.
Ove
r the
Cou
nter
(See
Ove
r the
C
ount
er w
ith P
lans
Map
)
If O
ver t
he C
ount
erS
eria
lR
evie
w
Cancelled by CentralPermit Bureau uponrequest of Plan Examiner
Exp
ires
in …
(fro
m h
old
date
):$1
~$9
9,99
9 –
39 c
alen
dar d
ays
$100
K ~
$1
Mill
ion
–69
cal
enda
rda
ys$1
Mill
ion+
-99
cal
enda
r day
s
Pay
s E
xten
sion
Fee
of $
32.8
0w
ith D
BI P
lan
Rev
iew
Ser
vice
son
2nd
Flo
or
SFF
D16
60 M
issi
on S
t.,2nd
Flo
or
Hou
sing
1660
Mis
sion
St.,
6th F
loor
DB
I Stru
ctur
al P
lan
Rev
iew
1660
Mis
sion
St.,
2nd
Flo
or
DP
W-B
SM
1660
Mis
sion
St,
1st F
loor
DP
H13
90 M
arke
tSt
Rev
iew
s, s
ends
out
plan
che
ck c
omm
ents
if ne
eded
to a
pplic
ant,
desi
gn p
rofe
ssio
nal
and
a co
urte
syfa
x to
pl
an ru
nner
App
lican
t mak
esR
eche
ck a
ppoi
ntm
ent
with
Pla
n Ex
amin
er
Pic
ks u
p da
ily fr
om2nd
floo
rbin
Logs
into
Per
mit
Trac
king
Sys
tem
Rev
iew
s fo
r stre
et/s
idew
alk
gene
ral i
ssue
sA
pplic
ant g
oes
on s
epar
ate
appl
icat
ion
with
DP
W-
BU
F an
d D
PW
-BS
M if
ther
e is
tree
and
land
scap
eTu
rnar
ound
time
5 B
usin
ess
Day
sTe
lls a
pplic
ant b
efor
ehan
d to
file
a fu
ll se
t to
875
Ste
vens
on S
t. of
fice,
who
will
em
ail t
he in
form
atio
nba
ck to
Sta
tion
num
ber 4
DP
W-B
SM
sta
ff.
Pic
ks u
p fro
m S
FFD
bin
Ass
igne
d M
on.a
nd T
ues.
mor
ning
Ass
ign
on P
erm
it Tr
acki
ngS
yste
m a
ccor
ding
toba
cklo
gTu
rnar
ound
tim
e 3-
4 w
eeks
for H
igh
Ris
eP
ut in
to P
lan
Exa
min
er’s
bin
(Pre
app
licat
ion
cove
rs w
ater
flow
cal
cula
tions
,pre
limin
ary
smok
e co
ntro
l)
??
SFR
A1
Sou
th V
an N
ess,
5th fl
oorW
ishe
s to
be
last
for r
evie
w/a
ppro
val
on s
ite p
erm
iton
lyfo
r cer
tain
jobs
. May
or’s
Offi
ce O
nD
isab
ility
401
Van
Nes
s, R
m 3
00
All
perm
itsus
ing
any
publ
icfu
nds
are
hand
carr
ied
to M
ayor
'sO
ffice
on D
isab
ility
for
revi
ew
Appl
ican
t com
pile
s al
l wor
king
sta
mpe
d se
ts in
to2
sets
of f
inal
pla
nsP
uts
all r
eche
ck c
hang
es s
heet
s to
geth
er
DBI
Mec
hani
cal P
lan
Rev
iew
1660
Mis
sion
St.,
2nd
Flo
or
DP
W B
SM
1660
Mis
sion
St,
1st F
loor
SFF
D16
60 M
issi
on S
t.,2nd
Flo
or
DB
I Mec
hani
cal P
lan
Rev
iew
1660
Mis
sion
St.,
2nd
Flo
or
Rev
iew
s fo
rM
echa
nica
l Cod
eC
ompl
ianc
e
Par
alle
l Rev
iew
with
Mul
tiple
Set
s of
Pla
nsan
dco
pies
of p
erm
it ap
plic
atio
n R
oute
dto
app
ropr
iate
sta
tions
Sign
Off
Part
ies
It is
then
the
appl
ican
t'sre
spon
sibi
lity
to c
onta
ct th
e in
divi
dual
dep
artm
ents
for f
inal
sign
off
mee
tings
, onc
e al
lof
the
plan
che
ck c
omm
ents
hav
e be
en a
ddre
ssed
.
Put
all
rech
eck
chan
ges
shee
ts to
DB
IP
lan
Rev
iew
Ser
vice
sD
BI C
entra
lPer
mit
Bur
eau
1660
Mis
sion
St,
1st F
loor
No
Res
pons
e
Recheck Appointment
Applicant brings additional setsand copies of permitapplication
Responsible for distribution
Inco
mpl
ete.
Fax
Com
men
ts to
App
lican
t. A
pplic
ant s
ubm
itson
2nd
floo
r*M
akes
sur
e th
e ch
ange
s do
es n
ot c
onfli
ct w
ith o
ther
age
ncie
s
DP
W-B
SM
875
Ste
vens
on
DP
W-B
UF
Cal
l 641
-264
6
Rec
heck
App
oint
men
t
Rev
ised
pla
nro
uted
inte
rnal
ly
Dec
embe
r 200
7
BPR
– Pl
an R
evie
w a
nd P
erm
it Is
suan
ce S
ubco
mm
ittee
To-
Be
Map
ping
:Res
iden
tial A
ltera
tions
and
Add
ition
s –
Add
endu
m S
ubm
ittal
KIO
SK
Sel
f che
ck-in
Aut
omat
ed c
usto
mer
track
ing
syst
emse
nds
to n
ext s
tatio
n(6
0 se
cond
s or
less
)
REC
OR
DS
May
be
requ
este
don
line
REG
ISTR
ATI
ON
Che
ck-in
Auto
mat
ed c
usto
mer
track
ing
syst
emse
nds
to n
ext s
tatio
n(6
0 se
cond
s or
less
)
Pay
fee
@C
ASH
IER
Pay
fee
@C
ASH
IER
Rej
ect /
M
ore
info
need
ed
INIT
IAL
PER
MIT
REV
IEW
(IPR
)
Nam
e ca
lled
via
Auto
mat
ed
cust
omer
trac
king
sys
tem
Esta
blis
h ap
prov
al d
isci
plin
esD
eter
min
e cu
stom
er ro
utin
gC
heck
for c
ompl
eten
ess
Verif
y m
atch
with
app
rove
d si
tepe
rmit
DPW
-BSM
pre
limin
ary
revi
ewEn
ter R
adio
Fre
quen
cyId
entif
icat
ion
(RFI
D) c
ode
to
draw
ings
Plac
e dr
awin
gs a
nd s
ubm
ittal
sin
appr
opria
te b
ins
for t
rans
fer t
o st
atio
nsC
usto
mer
to p
rovi
de c
opy
of
appr
oved
site
per
mit
plan
s
PER
MIT
ISSU
AN
CE
STA
TIO
N
Che
cks
draw
ings
to m
ake
sure
all
sign
offs
com
plet
eD
eter
min
e fin
al v
alua
tion
incl
udin
gSc
hool
fees
, SFP
UC
, SF
Mun
icip
alTr
ansi
t (M
UN
I), e
tc.
Send
s cu
stom
er to
cas
hier
whi
ledr
awin
gs a
re s
tam
ped
and
appr
oved
Cus
tom
er c
olla
tes
appr
oved
dra
win
gs to
prod
uce
two
final
appr
oved
set
s
DB
I Str
uctu
ral
Plan
Rev
iew
May
be
reje
cted
if
not c
ode
com
plia
ntIf
chan
ges
requ
ired,
eac
h di
scip
line
notif
ies
cust
omer
per
corre
ctio
nsC
usto
mer
mak
es
rech
eck
appo
intm
ent f
orea
ch d
isci
plin
e
ALL
CU
STO
MER
S
FREQ
UEN
T C
UST
OM
ERS
Yes,
ifre
ques
ted
Yes,
ifre
ques
ted
CO
MPL
ETE
SUB
MIT
TAL
OR
OB
TAIN
MO
RE
INFO
RM
ATI
ON
Paym
ent f
orre
prod
uctio
nsre
quire
d?YE
SR
etur
n w
ith re
ceip
tto
col
lect
dra
win
gs
Pay
revi
ewfe
eR
etur
n w
ithre
ceip
t
App
rove
d
Issu
e pe
rmit
and
job
card
. R
etur
n to
pic
kup
app
rove
d st
ampe
ddr
awin
gs
If te
nant
dis
plac
emen
t, 15
cal
enda
rda
yho
ld, o
nce
fees
pai
d
NO
MEC
HA
NIC
AL
SFPU
C
SFR
A
DPH
DPW
-BSM
SFFD
MO
D
Sep
arat
e pe
rmit(
s)re
quire
dD
oes
not h
old
up
appr
oval
sFi
nal i
nspe
ctio
nre
quire
s pe
rmit
appr
oval
s
STA
RT
Fill
oute
lect
roni
cap
plic
atio
n on
line
or a
t Per
mit
Cen
teri
f abl
e at
cust
omer
are
a.
FIN
ISH
FIN
ISH
Plan
ning
Dep
artm
ent r
evie
wan
d ap
prov
al
Hol
d re
quire
d?
HEL
P D
ESK
Cod
e qu
estio
nsPr
oces
s qu
estio
nsPo
licie
s an
d pr
oced
ures
Is it
iden
tical
to a
ppro
ved
site
perm
it? YES
NO
AFT
ER P
LAN
NIN
G D
EPA
RTM
ENT
APP
RO
VAL
IPR
to
dete
rmin
e if
OTC
?
NO
YES
Go
to “T
o-Be
” Map
ping
fo
r OTC
IPR
to: Col
lect
mul
tiple
copi
es o
f pla
ns
from
cus
tom
erSe
t up
rout
ing
loca
tions
and
se
quen
ceR
oute
pla
ns to
di
scip
lines
Det
erm
ine
turn
arou
nd ti
mes
Dis
cipl
ine
supe
rvis
or to
es
timat
e re
view
hour
sTu
rnar
ound
tim
esm
arke
d on
pla
nsPl
ans
assi
gned
to
staf
f
Plan
s de
liver
ed to
disc
iplin
es w
ithin
one
busi
ness
day
Perm
it hi
stor
yre
quire
d?
Perm
it hi
stor
yre
quire
d?N
O
NO
YES
December 2007 Page 53
G. RESIDENTIAL DEMOLITION/NEW CONSTRUCTION – SITE PERMIT
“As-Is” Mapping Issues:
• No tracking of customer; wait times vary. Bottlenecks occur and some fees for service are lost.
• Limited screening of application materials. • Limited coordination among DBI and other agencies. • Order of review by different agencies is uncertain. • Rechecking of documents among agencies; limited coordination between agencies. • Limited coordination of public notification among DBI and other agencies. • Too many forms.
“To-Be” Mapping Narrative:
1. Registration or self-help kiosk, directed to Initial Permit Review (IPR). No more than 60 seconds.
2. Help Desk is available for general questions and procedures for all categories listed
below. a. Obtaining records. b. Registration or self help kiosk (no more than 60 seconds), routed to records
station. c. Triage and recheck appointments, non-DBI submittals, records, applications
(example: Planning conditional use or variance applications). d. Registration or self help kiosk (no more than 60 seconds), routed to station.
3. Pre-application (voluntary, but highly recommended) coordination
conference with DBI, Planning Department, DPW-BSM, SFPUC, SFFD, SFRA, etc. (for a fee), to address specific questions regarding code interpretations, prior to submitting the application. Written determinations are to be provided by all participating agencies.
4. IPR Permit Technician determines fee valuation and sends customer to
cashier for filing and plan review fee payment, prior to any work being performed.
a. Issue one permit for both demolition and replacement. Add box to PTS to check off.
5. Cursory plan review at IPR is to be increased to capture more code issues
during initial plan review. a. To ensure early tracking of SFPUC wastewater/water capacity charges, drawings
must include information such as square footage, fixture count, etc.) for all permit applications.
b. If project falls within SFFD jurisdiction, preliminary review is required by the SFFD.
December 2007 Page 54
6. Planning Department staff (or SFRA, if in its jurisdiction) is to make initial determination on actual approvals during initial plan review, to determine if project may even proceed. a. Planning Department staff or IPR Permit Technician to determine if eviction is
part of this work, resulting in project being put on hold, pending outcome. b. IPR completeness check needs to indicate if the project is subject to a
conditional use application. For example, all residential demolitions require a conditional use authorization. This affects both the notice and the appeals process and must be coordinated among DBI and Planning Department.
7. Customer returns with receipt from cashier to continue processing.
8. IPR Permit Technician performs all other tasks listed in this Report Section III B,
“Department of Building Inspection: Permit Center, Station 2.”
9. Use Radio Frequency Identification (RFID) codes to automate tracking of plans (the San Francisco Library just did this).
10. Application and drawings are routed to Planning Department for discretionary
review process. 11. Planning Department “log-in” of workload and assignment to reviewer. Use PTS to
automate. Email sent to customer resulting in more clarity to identify Planner, sent to DBI to estimate turnaround time. a. After discretionary process is completed, Planning Department approved plans
sent to DBI within one business day. b. Application has limited review by DBI and SFFD for site permit issues only. If
application requires changes prior to site permit approval, notification is made to IPR Permit Technician. Customer is notified by IPR Permit Technician via email and mail. Customer retrieves plans, makes necessary changes or provides additional information. Recheck appointment is scheduled with DBI or SFFD for site permit issues sign-off.
c. If SFDBI and SFFD approve for site permit issues, application proceeds to Processing Station. Customer notified via email and mail - maybe full set of plans or site permit approval only – customer is responsible for next action. Customer is notified of number of sets required for addenda submittal(s). Limited number of addenda is allowed for Residential Demolition/New Construction.
d. When customer is notified of approval of site permit (automatic by system), customer decides whether to opt for “Express on Premium Plan”, pay fee and be routed there.
12. IPR Permit Technician determines routing to other stations for addendum. 13. Options for customer for site permit and full submittal approvals:
a. Site permit approval (Customer requests after discretionary process at Planning Department or SFRA) - Starts the clock for 15 calendar days appeal process. Customer picks up drawings and application at Processing Station and proceeds with approval process.
December 2007 Page 55
b. Site permit submittal – allows for initial review by Planning Department or SFRA, without expending fees for the structural addendum.
c. Full permit review submittal – allows for either split submittal for site permit or for full submittal of site permit and structural addendum.
8:00
AM
–3:
45 P
MC
usto
mer
sig
ns in
Sr.
Pla
nE
xam
iner
chec
ks fo
r co
mpl
eten
ess
Dev
elop
s R
outin
g on
Com
pute
r
8:00
AM
–5:
00 P
MTa
ke a
num
ber (
5 –
60 m
in.w
ait)
Che
ck e
ntitl
emen
tsV
erify
pro
perty
info
on
Pla
nnin
g D
epar
tmen
tda
taba
seIf
hist
oric
al, c
usto
mer
mus
t tal
k to
a h
isto
rical
pres
erva
tioni
st –
his
toric
al p
rese
rvat
ioni
sts
are
only
at th
e co
unte
r 2.5
hou
rs p
erda
yC
heck
BB
N, P
lann
ing
viol
atio
n, ½
fee,
etc
.Id
entif
y P
lann
er fo
rrou
ting
If ok
, ini
tial A
CC
EP
T on
rout
ing
slip
STA
RT
DB
I Int
ake
Cou
nter
1660
Mis
sion
St.
4th F
loor
Freq
uent
or E
xper
ienc
ed C
usto
mer
s w
ith P
erm
it Fo
rmat
tach
ed w
ith P
re-A
pplic
atio
nLe
tter,
othe
r per
mit
appr
oval
cond
ition
s a
nd tr
eedi
sclo
sure
sta
tem
ent w
ith2
sets
of S
ite P
erm
it P
lans
Pla
nnin
g D
epar
tmen
tIn
form
atio
n C
ount
er(P
IC)
(1st
Floo
r Sta
tion
1)
DP
W –
BS
M(1
st F
loor
, Sta
tion
4)
SFF
D P
lan
Rev
iew
(4th F
loor
)
8:00
AM
–5:
00P
MSi
gn in
on
the
clip
boar
d an
d w
ait t
o be
cal
led
Rev
iew
app
licat
ion
for
SFFD
cod
e co
mpl
ianc
eId
entif
y ot
her p
erm
itsre
quire
d
Aug
ust 0
8, 2
007
BPR
-Pla
nR
evie
w a
nd P
erm
it Is
suan
ce S
ubco
mm
ittee
As-
Is M
appi
ng: R
esid
entia
l Dem
oliti
on/N
ew C
onst
ruct
ion
– Si
te P
erm
it
Vol
unta
ryP
re A
pplic
atio
n P
hase
Pla
nnin
g D
epar
tmen
t16
50 M
issi
on S
t.4th
Flo
or
DB
I16
60 M
issi
on S
t.2nd
Flo
or
8:00
AM
–5:
00 P
MS
ubm
it ap
plic
atio
nfo
rmw
ith $
710
fee
Inta
ke b
y cl
erk,
give
n to
qu
adra
nt; s
ched
ule
appo
intm
ent (
incl
udes
envi
ronm
enta
l and
his
toric
alre
view
)Tw
o w
eek
wai
t for
appo
intm
ent f
or a
n ad
viso
rym
eetin
gN
othi
ng is
writ
ten,
but
they
ca
n re
ques
t for
a w
ritte
nle
tter o
f det
erm
inat
ion
from
the
Zoni
ng A
dmin
istra
tor
If no
t sat
isfie
d, h
ave
the
Zoni
ng A
dmin
istra
tor t
o w
rite
a le
tter a
nd th
e le
tter
can
be a
ppea
led
thro
ugh
Boa
rd o
f App
eals
8:00
AM
–5:
00 P
MS
ubm
it le
tter w
ith fe
eIn
clud
es S
FFD
,Bui
ldin
gE
ngin
eerin
g/M
echa
nica
l,et
c.P
lan
Rev
iew
Ser
vice
sst
affr
evie
ws
and
deci
des
who
sho
uld
atte
nd (D
BI,
Pla
nnin
g D
epar
tmen
t,S
FFD
)P
re A
pp te
am le
ader
48ho
urs
to a
rran
gem
eetin
gTe
n da
ys to
con
duct
mee
ting
Acc
eptf
ees
for a
genc
ies
Lette
r of D
eter
min
atio
ndr
afte
d w
ithin
2 w
eeks
Lette
r may
be
appe
aled
thro
ugh
the
chai
n of
com
man
d to
Dire
ctor
8:00
AM
–5:
00 P
MC
all 8
-606
0 fro
mho
use
phon
eR
evie
w fo
rco
mpl
eten
ess
Iden
tify
othe
rpe
rmits
requ
ired
DB
I Cen
tral P
erm
itB
urea
u(1
st F
loor
)
8:00
AM
–4:
30 P
MTa
ke a
num
ber a
ndw
ait
Cus
tom
er p
ays
plan
chec
k fe
esP
uts
in b
info
rP
lann
ing
Dep
artm
ent
pick
up
Pla
nnin
g D
epar
tmen
t16
50 M
issi
onS
t.S
uite
400
8:00
AM
–5:
00P
MR
evie
w b
y P
lann
erVe
rifie
s th
at c
ondi
tions
of a
ppro
vala
re s
how
non
pla
ns
DB
I Pla
nR
evie
w S
ervi
ces
1660
Mis
sion
St.
2nd F
loor
Cle
rk d
eliv
ers
to D
BI o
nce/
day
8:00
AM
–5:
00 P
MC
hief
Cle
rk g
ets
2 se
ts o
f sta
mpe
dpl
ans
and
othe
rdo
cum
ents
.Lo
gs in
on
Perm
it Tr
acki
ngS
yste
m (P
TS) o
n ar
rival
date
Put
s in
back
vau
ltW
orkl
oad
Man
ager
det
erm
ines
num
ber o
f hou
rs fo
r rev
iew
(for s
ite H
igh
Ris
e –
4 hr
s)D
eter
min
es n
ext a
vaila
ble
Pla
n E
xam
iner
with
the
leas
tba
ck lo
gV
erifi
es ro
utin
g
Cal
ls a
pplic
ant t
o su
bmit
addi
tiona
lse
ts o
f pla
ns p
er ro
utin
g
SFP
UC
1660
Mis
sion
St.,
1st F
loor
Pic
ks u
p fro
m b
inFe
es a
ssig
ned
Cen
tral P
erm
it B
urea
u16
60 M
issi
on S
t.,1st
Flo
or
For i
nclu
sion
ary
hous
ing
8:00
AM
–4:
30 P
MC
alcu
late
fina
l fee
sC
alcu
late
Sch
ool F
ees,
Cal
-OS
HA
, and
oth
er p
aym
entv
erifi
catio
nIf
ther
e ar
e in
clus
iona
ry fe
es, c
alls
Pla
nnin
g D
epar
tmen
tto
sign
off
and
if th
eP
lann
eris
not
ava
ilabl
e,ca
ll th
eir b
oss
to v
erify
the
fee
App
lican
t tak
es a
num
ber a
nd w
aits
SF
Uni
fied
Sch
ool
Dis
trict
, Cal
-OS
HA
,E
tc. .
..
Rec
eive
oth
er fe
es.
Mus
t go
to o
ther
dep
artm
ents
to p
ay
Ret
urn
to D
BI t
opa
y is
suan
cefe
es
Site
Per
mit
Issu
ed w
ithno
Add
endu
mS
ched
ule
$
$
$B
egin
Add
endu
mS
ubm
ittal
15 C
alen
darD
ays
App
eal P
erio
d(If
not
pur
suan
t to
Con
ditio
nal U
se)
SFF
D16
60 M
issi
on S
t.,2nd
Flo
orD
BI P
lan
Rev
iew
Ser
vice
s16
60 M
issi
on S
t., 2
nd F
loor
DP
W-B
SM
1660
Mis
sion
St,
1st
Floo
r
DP
H13
90 M
arke
t St
Rev
iew
s, s
ends
out
plan
che
ckco
mm
ents
if n
eede
dto
app
lican
t, de
sign
prof
essi
onal
and
a
cour
tesy
fax
to p
lan
runn
erA
pplic
ant m
akes
Rec
heck
appo
intm
ent w
ithP
lan
Exa
min
er
Pic
ks u
p da
ily fr
om 2
nd fl
oor b
inLo
gs in
to P
erm
it Tr
acki
ng S
yste
m (P
TS)
Rev
iew
s fo
r stre
et/s
idew
alk
gene
ral
issu
esA
pplic
ant g
oes
on s
epar
ate
appl
icat
ion
with
DP
W-B
UF
and
DP
W-B
SM
Turn
arou
nd ti
me
5 Bu
sine
ss D
ays
Tells
app
lican
t bef
oreh
and
to fi
le a
full
set t
o 87
5 S
teve
nson
St.
offic
e, w
ho w
illem
ail t
he in
form
atio
n ba
ck to
Sta
tion
num
ber 4
DP
W-B
SM
sta
ff
Pic
ks u
p fro
m S
FFD
bin
Ass
igne
d M
on. a
ndTu
es. m
orni
ngA
ssig
n on
Per
mit
Trac
king
Sys
tem
(PTS
) acc
ordi
ngto
back
log
Turn
arou
nd ti
me
3-4
wee
ks fo
r Hig
h R
ise
Put
into
Pla
nE
xam
iner
’s b
in(P
re-a
pplic
atio
n co
vers
wat
er fl
ow c
alcu
latio
ns,
prel
imin
ary
Sm
oke
cont
rol)
?
SFR
A1
Sou
th V
an N
ess,
5th fl
oor
Wis
hes
to b
e la
stfo
r rev
iew
/ap
prov
al o
n si
te
perm
it on
lyfo
rce
rtain
jobs
May
or’s
Offi
ce O
nD
isab
ility
401
Van
Nes
s,R
m 3
00
All
perm
its u
sing
any
publ
ic fu
nds
are
hand
car
ried
to
May
or's
Offi
ce o
nD
isab
ility
for r
evie
w
RE
CH
EC
K A
PP
OIN
TME
NT
App
lican
t com
pile
s al
lsta
mpe
d se
ts in
to 2
set
s of
pla
nsA
nd c
oord
inat
es S
ign
Off
Par
ty
Rec
heck
app
oint
men
t is
mad
e w
ith th
e P
lan
Exa
min
erdi
rect
ly o
r with
DB
IPla
nR
evie
w S
ervi
ces
Sta
ffA
pplic
ant a
nd P
lan
Exa
min
erm
eet a
nd g
o ov
er p
lans
toge
ther
If ok
ay, P
lan
Exa
min
erst
amps
and
sig
ns o
ffIf
mor
e ch
ange
s ne
ed to
be
mad
e,A
pplic
ant m
ust m
ake
chan
ges,
and
resc
hedu
le a
n ap
poin
tmen
t to
mee
t aga
in
Sig
n O
ff “P
arty
” Put
all
rech
eck
chan
ges
shee
tsto
DB
IP
lan
Rev
iew
Ser
vice
sD
BI P
lan
Rev
iew
Ser
vice
s16
60 M
issi
onS
t., 2
nd F
loor
Pla
nnin
gD
epar
tmen
t
Not
incl
usio
nary
hous
ing
SFR
A1
Sou
th V
an N
ess
Pro
ject
spo
nsor
file
sO
wne
r Par
ticip
atio
nA
gree
men
t
Planning Department Clerk picks up plans every dayCPBlogs out on PermitTracking System (PTS)Planning Department logs in on Permit Tracking System (PTS)Route to quadrant team leader who already approvedfrom discretionary review/environmental (all before submitting to DBI)Adds CPZOC on routingfir for inclusionary housing permits
Applicant returns withadditional sets
Dec
embe
r 200
7
BPR
– P
lan
Rev
iew
and
Per
mit
Issu
ance
Subc
omm
ittee
To-B
eM
appi
ng:
Res
iden
tial D
emol
ition
/New
Con
stru
ctio
n –
Site
Perm
it
REG
ISTR
ATI
ON
Che
ck in
Aut
omat
ed c
usto
mer
track
ing
syst
em s
ends
to
next
sta
tion
(60
seco
nds
orle
ss)
REC
OR
DS
May
be
orde
red
onlin
e
KIO
SK
Sel
f che
ck-in
Aut
omat
ed c
usto
mer
track
ing
syst
em s
ends
to
next
sta
tion
(60
seco
nds
orle
ss)
HEL
P D
ESK
Cod
e qu
estio
ns.
Pro
cess
que
stio
ns.
Pol
icie
s an
d pr
oced
ures
Pay
fees
@C
ASH
IER
INIT
IAL
PER
MIT
REV
IEW
(IPR
)
Nam
e ca
lled
via
Aut
omat
edcu
stom
er tr
acki
ng s
yste
mE
stab
lish
appr
oval
dis
cipl
ines
Det
erm
ine
cust
omer
rout
ing
Che
ck fo
r com
plet
enes
sC
heck
Hou
sing
sta
tus
Che
ck fo
r NO
VC
heck
for l
ot/b
lock
/add
ress
Add
add
ress
to P
TS, i
fne
cess
ary
Che
ck o
ccup
ancy
cla
ss,u
seD
eter
min
e fe
e ev
alua
tions
Che
ck fo
r SFP
UC
Was
tew
ater
/W
ater
Cap
acity
Cha
rges
Che
ck a
ppro
val o
fGre
enR
ecyc
ling
Prog
ram
Che
ckB
usin
ess
Tax
Reg
istra
tion,
Wor
kers
Com
pens
atio
n, c
ontra
ctor
info
,et
c.D
PW-B
SM p
relim
inar
y re
view
Che
ck if
his
toric
reso
urce
SFFD
sta
ff re
view
forg
ener
alco
nfor
man
cePl
anni
ng D
epar
tmen
t sta
ff re
view
forg
ener
alco
nfor
man
ce, p
hoto
s, p
re-
appl
icat
ion,
nei
ghbo
rno
tific
atio
n in
fo, e
tc.
Ent
er R
adio
Fre
quen
cyid
entif
icat
ion
( RFI
D) c
ode
to
draw
ings
Che
ck fo
r eas
emen
tsC
heck
for m
ajor
cod
e is
sues
Iden
tify
in P
TS th
is is
a
Con
ditio
nal-U
se a
pplic
atio
n
PRO
CES
SIN
G S
TATI
ON
Che
cks
draw
ings
to m
ake
sure
P
lann
ing
Dep
artm
ent o
r SFR
Asi
gns
off
Not
ify c
usto
mer
site
per
mit
is re
ady
Opt
ion
1: C
usto
mer
pic
ksup
pla
ns if
site
per
mit
is n
ot re
ques
ted
Opt
ion
2: S
ite p
erm
it is
requ
este
dD
eter
min
e fin
al v
alua
tion
and
fees
FIN
ISH
FIN
ISH
FREQ
UEN
TC
UST
OM
ERS
ALL
CU
STO
MER
S
Yes,
ifre
ques
ted
Pay
Rev
iew
Fee
Ret
urn
with
Rec
eipt
Ret
urn
with
rece
ipt t
o co
llect
draw
ings
.
Paym
ent f
orre
prod
uctio
nsre
quire
d?YE
S
Yes,
ifre
ques
ted
OB
TAIN
INFO
RM
ATI
ON
OR
AB
ATE
VIO
LATI
ON
S
PRE-
APP
LIC
ATI
ON
conf
eren
ce w
ithal
lag
enci
es s
trong
lyen
cour
aged
.M
anda
tory
pre
-ap
plic
atio
nco
nfer
ence
with
all
agen
cies
forl
arge
resi
dent
ial a
ndhi
ghris
es
STA
RT
Fill
out
elec
troni
cap
plic
atio
n on
line
or a
tPer
mit
Cen
ter
if ab
le a
t cus
tom
erar
ea
PRO
CEE
D W
ITH
PLA
NS
FOR
AD
DEN
DU
M
PRO
CES
S W
HEN
REA
DY
SFR
A
As
requ
ired
Sta
ff re
view
proc
ess
Not
ifica
tions
Com
mis
sion
hea
rings
App
rova
lsC
ompa
re w
ith p
revi
ous
appr
oval
s
PLA
NN
ING
DEP
AR
TMEN
T
Ent
er in
to P
TS to
Qua
dran
tle
ader
Qua
dran
t Lea
der h
olds
unt
ilas
sign
ed P
lann
er is
read
y to
revi
ewP
lann
er h
as c
lerk
pro
cess
notif
icat
ion
mat
eria
ls a
fter
appr
oval
and
pla
ces
on 3
0-da
yho
ld o
nce
Not
ice
is s
ent o
utM
axim
um tu
rn a
roun
dtim
eex
clus
ive
of h
olds
: 21
DA
YS
App
oint
men
ts fo
r sub
mitt
ing
CU
, Var
ianc
eor
ME
Aap
plic
atio
ns to
the
Pla
nnin
gD
epar
tmen
t to
be w
ithin
two
wee
ks
PLA
NN
ING
DEP
AR
TMEN
TC
OU
NTE
R
Ass
ists
with
app
licat
ion
Rec
eive
s pa
ymen
tR
evie
ws
subm
ittal
Ent
ers
info
into
PTS
Set
s ca
lend
ar fo
rhe
arin
g
Cus
tom
er s
uppl
ies
notif
icat
ion
list,
form
s,pa
ys fo
r or s
uppl
ies
enve
lope
s –
dual
DB
Ian
d P
lann
ing
Dep
artm
ent n
otifi
catio
nPO
ST N
OTI
CE
PLA
NN
ING
Dep
artm
ent
CLE
RK
post
s no
tific
atio
nm
ater
ials
App
licat
ion
subm
ittal
s dr
awin
gs
and
ent
er in
to P
TSan
d tr
ansf
er to
Plan
ning
Dep
artm
ent
App
rove
d
SFR
AIf
requ
ired
prio
r to
subm
ittal
Lim
ited
DB
Iand
SFFD
revi
ew fo
r site
per
mit
only
TO P
LAN
NIN
GD
EPA
RTM
ENT
FOR
:
Dis
cret
iona
ry R
evie
wap
plic
atio
nC
ondi
tiona
l-Use
(CU
)(M
anda
tory
, by
appo
intm
ent)
Var
ianc
e (b
y ap
poin
tmen
t)R
ecor
dsG
ener
al in
form
atio
n
TO P
LAN
NIN
G D
EPA
RTM
ENT
FOR
:
Dis
cret
iona
ry R
evie
w a
pplic
atio
nC
ondi
tiona
l-Use
(CU
) (M
anda
tory
, by
appo
intm
ent)
Var
ianc
e (b
yap
poin
tmen
t)R
ecor
dsG
ener
al in
form
atio
nR
ejec
t /
Furt
her
info
need
ed
Rej
ect /
Furt
her
info
need
ed
Per
mit
hist
ory
requ
ired?
Per
mit
hist
ory
requ
ired?
PRO
VID
E A
DD
ITIO
NA
LIN
FOR
MA
TIO
N O
R R
EVIS
ION
S
Fina
lPla
nnin
gD
epar
tmen
tapp
rova
l
Initi
alZo
ning
App
rova
l
Tran
sfer
with
inon
e bu
sine
ss d
ay
Proc
eed
to IP
R
PLA
NN
ING
DEP
AR
TMEN
TR
EVIE
WO
NLY
NO
PLA
NN
ING
DEP
AR
TMEN
T R
EVIE
W O
NLY
Pay
fees
@C
ASH
IER
Issu
e pe
rmit.
Ret
urn
topi
ck u
p st
ampe
d dr
awin
gs
App
rove
site
perm
it?
YES
Pub
lic H
earin
g re
quire
d.Ap
prov
al, D
isap
prov
alor
Rev
isio
ns re
quire
d
NO
PRO
VID
ER
EVIS
ION
S, IF
REQ
UIR
ED
Rej
ect /
Fu
rthe
rre
visi
ons
need
ed
Not
App
rove
d
App
rove
d
December 2007 Page 58
H. RESIDENTIAL DEMOLITION/NEW CONSTRUCTION – ADDENDUM “As-Is” Mapping Issues:
• Order of review by different agencies is uncertain. • Rechecking of documents among agencies; limited coordination among agencies. • Limited coordination of recheck appointments and collating drawings for final review. • Limited tracking of drawings. • No guaranteed turnaround times.
“To-Be” Mapping Narrative:
1. Full submittal sets, parallel plan review: customer is notified number of sets
required, based on routing. Customer brings copy of approved site permit. a. IPR Permit Technician is responsible for checking for completeness of
addendum submittal and that it matches approved site permit. b. Turnaround times for first set of plan review comments after initial plan review
to be within 10 business days for small projects, 20 business days for medium projects (See Performance Measures Subcommittee Report for specific project descriptions).
c. Recheck appointments to be scheduled with original plan examiner within three business days from day of request.
d. Customer to control rechecks with original plan examiner when ready for all disciplines.
2. Help Desk is available for general questions and procedures for all categories listed
below. a. Obtaining records. b. Registration or self help kiosk (no more than 60 seconds), routed to records
station. c. Triage and recheck appointments, non-DBI submittals, records, applications
(example: Planning conditional use or variance applications). d. Registration or self help kiosk (no more than 60 seconds), routed to station.
3. Customer responsible for obtaining sign-offs from each station, collating drawings
to make two approved sets. 4. Permit Technician at Permit Issuance Station verifies that all stations have
approved the drawings. 5. Permit Technician at Permit Issuance Station determines final plan review valuation
and sends customer to cashier for final permit fee payment and to obtain permit and job card. While applicant pays fee, Permit Technician stamps drawings. Customer returns with permit, job card and receipt from cashier and collects drawings.
8:00
AM
–3:
45 P
MC
usto
mer
sig
ns in
Sr.
Pla
n E
xam
iner
che
cks
for
com
plet
enes
s ba
sed
on w
hat y
our
subm
ittal
nee
ds –
nec
essa
rydo
cum
ents
, ref
eren
ce d
raw
ings
, cop
yof
Site
Per
mit
Pac
kage
for E
ACH
adde
ndum
with
num
ber o
f set
s fo
rnu
mbe
r of s
tatio
nsA
ttach
es A
dden
dum
car
d,V
erifi
es c
orre
ctro
utin
gS
tam
ps a
nd lo
gs in
to P
erm
it Tr
acki
ngS
yste
mA
pplic
ant s
igns
add
enda
card
If ap
plic
ant b
rings
less
set
s th
an th
enu
mbe
r of s
tatio
ns, t
hey
can
brin
g it
late
r
8:00
AM
–5:
00 P
MTa
ke a
num
ber (
5 –
60 m
in. w
ait)
Che
ck e
ntitl
emen
tsV
erify
pro
perty
info
on
Pla
nnin
gD
epar
tmen
t dat
abas
e.If
hist
oric
al, c
usto
mer
mus
t tal
k to
a
hist
oric
al p
rese
rvat
ioni
st –
his
toric
alpr
eser
vatio
nist
sar
e on
ly a
t the
cou
nter
2.5
hour
s pe
r day
Che
ck B
BN
,Pla
nnin
g vi
olat
ion,
½ fe
e,
etc.
Iden
tify
Plan
ner f
or ro
utin
gIf
ok, i
nitia
l AC
CEP
Ton
rout
ing
slip
Site
Per
mit
Issu
ed
DB
I Int
ake
Cou
nter
1660
Mis
sion
St.
4th F
loor
App
lican
t ret
urns
with
min
imum
2se
ts o
f pla
ns w
ith c
lear
ly m
arke
dco
ver s
heet
say
ing
wha
t the
yar
e su
bmitt
ing
for
Pla
nnin
g D
epar
tmen
tIn
form
atio
n C
ount
er (P
IC)
(1st
Floo
r Sta
tion
1)
Aug
ust 8
,200
7
BPR
-Pl
anR
evie
w a
nd P
erm
it Is
suan
ce S
ubco
mm
ittee
As-
IsM
appi
ng: R
esid
entia
l Dem
oliti
on/N
ew C
onst
ruct
ion
-Add
endu
m
If thereare changes to the SitePermit that impactPlanning Department, must be routedto Planning Department.
DB
I Pla
n R
evie
w S
ervi
ces
1660
Mis
sion
St.
2nd F
loor
Inte
rnal
Rou
ting
No
Cha
nges
to S
ite
8:00
AM
–4:
45 P
MA
rriv
es in
bac
kva
ult
Wor
kloa
dM
anag
er d
eter
min
es n
umbe
r of h
ours
for
revi
ewD
eter
min
es n
ext a
vaila
ble
Plan
Exa
min
erw
ith th
ele
ast b
ack
log
Ver
ifies
rout
ing
If ad
ditio
nal s
ets
are
need
ed,
Cal
ls a
pplic
antt
o su
bmit
per r
outin
g
DB
I Stru
ctur
al P
lan
Rev
iew
1660
Mis
sion
St.,
2nd
Flo
or
RE
CH
EC
K A
PP
OIN
TME
NT
Rec
heck
app
oint
men
t is
mad
e w
ithth
e st
aff
App
lican
t and
Pla
n E
xam
iner
mee
t and
go
over
pla
ns to
geth
erIf
okay
, Pla
n E
xam
iner
sta
mps
and
sig
ns o
ffIf
mor
e ch
ange
sne
edto
be
mad
e, A
pplic
ant m
ust m
ake
chan
ges,
and
resc
hedu
lean
appo
intm
ent t
o m
eeta
gain
If there aremajor changes,MUSTsubmit alternative Site Permit
DB
I Pla
n R
evie
w S
ervi
ces
staf
f ver
ifies
all
need
ed s
tam
psfro
m o
ther
div
isio
ns a
nd d
epar
tmen
ts
WO
RK
UN
DE
RW
AY
DB
IPla
n R
evie
w S
ervi
ces
1660
Mis
sion
St.,
2nd
Flo
or
App
lican
t ret
urns
with
add
ition
al s
ets
No
resp
onse
Upo
n ex
pira
tion
date
,ap
plic
ant i
s se
nt a
w
arni
ng le
tter.
Ove
r the
Cou
nter
(See
Ove
r-th
e-C
ount
er w
ith P
lans
Map
)
If O
ver-t
he-C
ount
er(O
TC)
Ser
ial
Rev
iew
Cancelled by Central Permit Bureauuponrequest of Plan Examiner
Exp
ires
in …
(fro
m h
old
date
):$1
~ $
99,9
99 –
39 c
alen
dar d
ays
$100
K ~
$1
Mill
ion
–69
cal
enda
rda
ys$1
Milli
on+
99 c
alen
dard
ays
Pay
s E
xten
sion
Fee
of $
32.8
0w
ith D
BIP
lan
Rev
iew
Ser
vice
son
2nd
Flo
or
SFF
D16
60 M
issi
onS
t.,2nd
Flo
orD
BI S
truct
ural
Pla
n R
evie
w16
60 M
issi
on S
t., 2
nd F
loor
DP
W-B
SM
1660
Mis
sion
St,
1st F
loor
DP
H13
90 M
arke
tSt
Rev
iew
s, s
ends
out
pl
an c
heck
com
men
tsif
need
ed to
app
lican
t,de
sign
pro
fess
iona
lan
da
cour
tesy
fax
topl
an ru
nner
App
lican
t mak
esR
eche
ck a
ppoi
ntm
ent
with
Pla
nE
xam
iner
Pic
ksup
dai
ly fr
om 2
nd fl
oor b
inLo
gs in
to P
erm
it Tr
acki
ng S
yste
mR
evie
ws
for s
treet
/sid
ewal
k ge
nera
l iss
ues
App
lican
t goe
s on
sep
arat
e ap
plic
atio
n w
ith D
PW
-BU
Fan
d D
PW-B
SM
if th
ere
is tr
ee a
nd la
ndsc
ape
Turn
arou
nd ti
me
5 B
usin
ess
Day
sTe
lls a
pplic
ant b
efor
ehan
d to
file
a fu
ll se
t to
875
Ste
vens
on S
t. of
fice,
who
will
emai
l the
info
rmat
ion
back
to S
tatio
n 4
DP
W-B
SM
sta
ff
Pic
ks u
p fro
m S
FFD
bin
Ass
igne
d M
on.a
nd T
ues.
mor
ning
Ass
ign
on P
erm
it Tr
acki
ngS
yste
m a
ccor
ding
toba
cklo
gTu
rnar
ound
tim
e 3-
4 w
eeks
for H
igh
Ris
eP
ut in
to P
lan
Exa
min
er’s
bin
(Pre
-app
licat
ion
cove
rs w
ater
flow
cal
cula
tions
,pre
limin
ary
Sm
oke
cont
rol)
?
SFR
A1
Sou
thV
an N
ess,
5th fl
oor
Wis
hes
to b
e la
stfo
r rev
iew
/ap
prov
al o
n si
tepe
rmit
only
for
certa
in jo
bs.
May
or’s
Offi
ce O
nD
isab
ility
401
Van
Nes
s, R
m 3
00
All
perm
its u
sing
any
publ
ic fu
nds
are
hand
car
ried
to
May
or’s
Offi
ce o
nD
isab
ility
for r
evie
w
App
lican
tcom
pile
s al
l wor
king
stam
ped
sets
into
2 s
ets
of fi
nal p
lans
Put
sal
l rec
heck
cha
nges
shee
ts to
geth
er
DBI
Mec
hani
cal P
lan
Rev
iew
1660
Mis
sion
St.,
2nd
Flo
or
DP
W-B
SM
1660
Mis
sion
St,
1st F
loor
SFF
D16
60 M
issi
on S
t.,2nd
Flo
or
DB
I Mec
hani
cal P
lan
Rev
iew
1660
Mis
sion
St.,
2nd
Flo
or
Rev
iew
s fo
r M
echa
nica
l Cod
eC
ompl
ianc
e
Sign
Off
Part
ies
It is
then
the
appl
ican
t'sre
spon
sibi
lity
to c
onta
ct th
e in
divi
dual
dep
artm
ents
for f
inal
sign
off
mee
tings
, onc
e al
lof
the
plan
che
ck c
omm
ents
hav
e be
en a
ddre
ssed
.
Put
all
rech
eck
chan
ges
shee
ts to
DB
I Pla
n R
evie
w S
ervi
ces
DB
I Cen
tral P
erm
it B
urea
u16
60 M
issi
onS
t, 1st
Flo
or
No
Res
pons
e
Applicant brings additional sets and copies of permit application
Responsible fordistribution
Inco
mpl
ete.
Fax
Com
men
ts to
App
lican
t.A
pplic
ant s
ubm
its o
n 2nd
floo
r*M
akes
sur
e th
e ch
ange
sdo
es n
ot c
onfli
ct w
ith o
ther
agen
cies
DP
W-B
SM
875
Ste
vens
on
DP
W-B
UF
Cal
l 641
-264
6
Recheck Appointment
Rec
heck
Appo
intm
ent
Rev
ised
pla
n ro
uted
inte
rnal
ly
Type
s of
Add
endu
ms:
Fou
ndat
ion
Sup
erst
ruct
ure
Arc
hite
ctur
al M
echa
nica
l/Ele
ctric
al/P
lum
bing
(in
clud
es S
mok
eC
ontro
l) E
xter
iorW
all
Spr
inkl
er/S
FFD
Ala
rm
Brin
gs re
vise
d pl
ans
forD
PW
-B
SM
* For
eac
had
dend
umsu
bmitt
al
Dec
embe
r 200
7
BPR
– P
lan
Rev
iew
and
Per
mit
Issu
ance
Sub
com
mitt
ee T
o-B
e M
appi
ng: R
esid
entia
l Dem
oliti
on/N
ew C
onst
ruct
ion
-Add
endu
m
REG
ISTR
ATI
ON
Che
ck in
Aut
omat
ed c
usto
mer
track
ing
syst
emse
nds
to n
ext s
tatio
n (6
0se
cond
s or
less
)
REC
OR
DS
May
be
orde
red
onlin
e
KIO
SK
Sel
f che
ck-in
Aut
omat
ed c
usto
mer
track
ing
syst
emse
nds
to n
ext s
tatio
n (6
0se
cond
s or
less
)
HEL
P D
ESK
Cod
e qu
estio
nsP
roce
ss q
uest
ions
Pol
icie
s an
d pr
oced
ures
Pay
Fee
@C
ASH
IER
INIT
IAL
PER
MIT
REV
IEW
(IPR
)
Nam
eca
lled
via
Aut
omat
edcu
stom
er tr
acki
ng s
yste
mE
stab
lish
appr
oval
disc
iplin
esD
eter
min
e cu
stom
er ro
utin
gC
heck
for c
ompl
eten
ess
Ver
ify m
atch
with
app
rove
dsi
te p
erm
itD
PW-B
SM p
relim
inar
yre
view
Ent
er R
adio
Fre
quen
cyid
entif
icat
ion
(RFI
D) c
ode
to
draw
ings
Pla
ce d
raw
ings
and
subm
ittal
s in
appr
opria
tebi
ns to
tran
sfer
to s
tatio
ns
PER
MIT
ISSU
AN
CE
STA
TIO
N
Che
cks
draw
ings
to m
ake
sure
all
sign
offs
com
plet
eD
eter
min
es fi
nalv
alua
tion,
incl
udin
g S
choo
l fee
s, S
FPU
C, S
FM
unic
ipal
Tra
nsit
(MU
NI),
etc
.S
ends
cus
tom
erto
Cas
hier
whi
ledr
awin
gs a
re s
tam
ped
App
rove
d
Rej
ect /
M
ore
info
need
ed
FIN
ISH
FREQ
UEN
T C
UST
OM
ERS
ALL
CU
STO
MER
S
Yes,
if
requ
este
d
Pay
Rev
iew
Fee
Ret
urn
with
Rec
eipt
Ret
urn
with
rece
ipt t
o co
llect
dr
awin
gs
Pay
men
t for
repr
oduc
tions
requ
ired?
YES
Yes,
ifre
ques
ted
CO
MPL
ETE
SUB
MIT
TAL
OR
OB
TAIN
MO
RE
INFO
RM
ATI
ON
Ret
urn
to p
ick
upap
prov
ed s
tam
ped
draw
ings
STA
RT
Cus
tom
er b
rings
appr
oved
site
perm
it se
tand
mul
tiple
add
endu
mse
ts
Sm
alle
r pro
ject
s,no
app
oint
men
ts
Larg
er p
roje
cts,
cust
omer
has
optio
n fo
rap
poin
tmen
t
DB
I Str
uctu
ral
Plan
Rev
iew
MEC
HA
NIC
AL
SFPU
C
SFR
A
DPH
DPW
-BSM
SFFD
MO
D
Cus
tom
er c
olla
tes
Appr
oved
dra
win
gs to
prod
uce
two
final
sets
May
be
reje
cted
if n
otco
de c
ompl
iant
If ch
ange
sre
quire
d,ea
ch s
tatio
nno
tifie
scu
stom
er fo
r co
rrec
tions
Cus
tom
er m
akes
rech
eck
appo
intm
ents
for e
ach
stat
ion
With
sig
n of
f at
mee
ting,
if a
ppro
ved
Sep
arat
e pe
rmit(
s)re
quire
dD
oes
not h
old
upap
prov
als
Fina
l ins
pect
ion
requ
ires
perm
itap
prov
als
NO
TE:
“Mas
ter P
lan”
or r
epet
itive
proj
ects
may
bere
view
edsi
mul
tane
ousl
yto
pre
vent
dup
licat
e pl
an c
heck
ing
NO
TE:
Enha
nced
ser
vice
ava
ilabl
e fo
r add
ition
al fe
e –
all s
tatio
ns
Plan
ning
Dep
artm
ent
revi
ew a
nd a
ppro
val
Per
mit
hist
ory
requ
ired?
Per
mit
hist
ory
Req
uire
d?
Is it
iden
tical
to a
ppro
ved
site
perm
it?
IPR
to: Col
lect
mul
tiple
copi
es o
f pla
nsfro
m c
usto
mer
Set
up
rout
ing
loca
tions
and
sequ
ence
Rou
te p
lans
todi
scip
lines
Det
erm
ine
turn
arou
nd ti
mes
Dis
cipl
ine
supe
rvis
or to
estim
ate
revi
ewho
urs
Turn
arou
nd ti
mes
mar
ked
on p
lans
Pla
ns a
ssig
ned
to
staf
f
Plan
s de
liver
ed to
Dis
cipl
ines
with
in o
nebu
sine
ss d
ay
YES
NO
NO N
O
AFT
ER P
LAN
NIN
G D
EPA
RTM
ENT
APP
RO
VAL
If te
nant
dis
plac
emen
t, 15
cal
enda
rda
yho
ld, o
nce
fees
pai
d
NO
FIN
ISH
Hol
d re
quire
d?YE
S
PAY
FEE
@
CA
SHIE
RA
ppro
ved
Issu
e Pe
rmit
and
Job
Car
dA
ppro
ved
December 2007 Page 61
I. NEW HIGH RISE – SITE PERMIT
“As-Is” Mapping Issues:
• No tracking of customer; wait times vary. Bottlenecks occur and some fees for service are lost.
• Limited coordination of application materials by all agencies. • Order of review by different agencies is uncertain. • Rechecking of documents among agencies; limited coordination among agencies. • Limited coordination of public notification among DBI and other agencies. • Too many forms.
“To-Be” Mapping Narrative:
1. Registration or self-help kiosk, directed to IPR (Initial Permit Review). No more
than 60 seconds. 2. Help Desk is available for general questions and procedures for all categories listed
below. a. Obtaining records. b. Registration or self help kiosk (no more than 60 seconds), routed to records
station. c. Triage and recheck appointments, non-DBI submittals, records, applications
(example: Planning conditional use or variance applications). d. Registration or self help kiosk (no more than 60 seconds), routed to station.
3. Mandatory pre-application coordination conference with DBI, Planning
Department, DPW-BSM, SFPUC, SFFD, SFRA, etc. (for a fee), to address specific questions regarding code interpretations, prior to submitting the application. Written determinations are to be provided by all participating agencies.
4. IPR Permit Technician determines fee valuation and sends customer to
cashier for filing and plan review fee payment, prior to any work being performed.
a. Issue one permit for both demolition and replacement. Add box to PTS to check off.
5. Cursory plan review at IPR is to be increased to capture more code issues during
initial plan review. a. To ensure early tracking of SFPUC wastewater/water capacity charges, drawings
must include information such as square footage, fixture count, etc. for all permit applications.
b. If project falls within SFFD jurisdiction, preliminary review is required by the SFFD.
December 2007 Page 62
6. Planning Department staff (or SFRA, if in its jurisdiction) is to make initial determination on actual approvals during initial plan review, to determine if project may even proceed. a. Planning Department staff or IPR Permit Technician to determine if eviction is
part of this work, resulting in project being put on hold, pending outcome. b. IPR completeness check needs to indicate if the project is subject to a
conditional use application. For example, all residential demolitions require a conditional use authorization. This affects both the notice and the appeals process and must be coordinated between DBI and Planning Department.
7. Customer returns with receipt from cashier to continue processing.
8. IPR Permit Technician performs all other tasks listed in this Report Section III B, “Department of Building Inspection: Permit Center, Station 2.”
9. Use Radio Frequency Identification (RFID) codes to automate tracking of plans
(the San Francisco Library just did this). 10. Application and drawings are routed to Planning Department for discretionary
review process. 11. Planning Department “log-in” of workload/assignment to reviewer. Use PTS to
automate. Email sent to customer resulting in more clarity to identify Planner, send to DBI to estimate turnaround time. a. After discretionary process is completed, Planning Department approved plans
sent to DBI within one business day. b. Application has limited review by DBI and SFFD for site permit issues only. If
application requires changes prior to site permit approval, notification is made to IPR Permit Technician. Customer is notified by IPR Permit Technician via email and mail. Customer retrieves plans, makes necessary changes or provides additional information. Recheck appointment is scheduled with DBI or SFFD for site permit issues sign-off.
c. If DBI and SFFD approve for site permit issues, application proceeds to Processing Station. Customer notified via email and mail – maybe full set of plans or site permit approval only – customer is responsible for next action. Customer is notified of number of sets required for addenda submittal(s). Limited number of addenda is allowed for Residential Demolition/New Construction.
d. When customer is notified of approval of site permit (automatic by system), customer decides whether to opt for “Express on Premium Plan”, pay fee and be routed there.
12. Customer supplies addendum schedule for IPR Permit Technician review and
approval. IPR Permit Technician determines routing to other stations for addendum. 13. Options for customer for site permit approvals:
a. Site permit approval (customer requests after discretionary process at Planning Department or SFRA) - Starts the clock for 15 calendar days appeal process.
December 2007 Page 63
Customer picks up drawings and application at Processing Station and proceeds with approval process. b. Site permit submittal – allows for initial review by Planning Department or SFRA,
without expending fees for the structural addendum.
8:00
AM
–3:
45 P
MC
usto
mer
sig
ns in
Sr.
Pla
nR
evie
wer
chec
ks fo
r co
mpl
eten
ess
Dev
elop
s R
outin
g on
Com
pute
r
8:00
AM
–5:
00 P
MTa
ke a
num
ber (
5 –
60 m
in.w
ait)
Che
ck e
ntitl
emen
tsV
erify
pro
perty
info
on
Pla
nnin
g D
epar
tmen
tda
taba
se.
If hi
stor
ical
, cus
tom
er m
ust t
alk
to a
his
toric
alpr
eser
vatio
nist
– h
isto
rical
pre
serv
atio
nist
s ar
eon
lyat
the
coun
ter 2
.5 h
ours
per
day.
Che
ck B
BN
, Pla
nnin
g vi
olat
ion,
½ fe
e, e
tc.
Iden
tify
Pla
nner
forr
outin
gIf
ok, i
nitia
l AC
CE
PT
on ro
utin
g sl
ip
STA
RT
DB
I Int
ake
Cou
nter
1660
Mis
sion
St.
4th F
loor
Freq
uent
or E
xper
ienc
ed C
usto
mer
s w
ith F
orm
½ a
ttach
ed w
ithP
re-A
pplic
atio
n Le
tter,
othe
rper
mit
appr
oval
con
ditio
ns a
nd tr
eedi
sclo
sure
sta
tem
ent w
ith2
sets
of S
ite P
erm
it Pl
ans.
Pla
nnin
g D
epar
tmen
t Inf
orm
atio
nC
ount
er (P
IC)
(1st
Floo
r Sta
tion
1)
DP
W –
BS
M(1
st F
loor
, Sta
tion
4)
SFF
D P
lan
Rev
iew
(4th F
loor
)
8:00
AM
–5:
00P
MSi
gn in
on
the
clip
boar
d an
d w
ait t
o be
cal
led
Rev
iew
app
licat
ion
for
SFFD
cod
e co
mpl
ianc
eId
entif
y ot
her p
erm
itsre
quire
d
Aug
ust 8
, 200
7
BPR
-Pl
an R
evie
w a
nd P
erm
it Is
suan
ce S
ubco
mm
ittee
As-
Is M
appi
ng: N
ew H
igh
Ris
e –
Site
Per
mit
Vol
unta
ryP
re A
pplic
atio
n P
hase
Pla
nnin
g D
epar
tmen
t16
50 M
issi
on S
t.4th
Flo
or
DB
I16
60 M
issi
on S
t.2nd
Flo
or
8:00
AM
–5:
00 P
MS
ubm
it ap
plic
atio
nfo
rmw
ith $
710
fee
Inta
ke b
y cl
erk,
give
n to
qu
adra
nt; s
ched
ule
appo
intm
ent (
incl
udes
envi
ronm
enta
l and
his
toric
alre
view
)Tw
o w
eek
wai
t for
appo
intm
ent f
or a
n ad
viso
rym
eetin
gN
othi
ng is
writ
ten,
but
they
ca
n re
ques
t for
a w
ritte
nle
tter o
f det
erm
inat
ion
from
the
Zoni
ng A
dmin
istra
tor
If no
t sat
isfie
d, h
ave
the
Zoni
ng A
dmin
istra
tor t
o w
rite
a le
tter a
nd th
e le
tter
can
be a
ppea
led
thro
ugh
Boa
rd o
f App
eals
8:00
AM
–5:
00 P
MS
ubm
it le
tter w
ith fe
eIn
clud
es S
FFD
,Bui
ldin
gE
ngin
eerin
g/M
echa
nica
l,et
c.P
lan
Rev
iew
Ser
vice
sst
affr
evie
ws
and
deci
des
who
sho
uld
atte
nd (D
BI,
Pla
nnin
g D
epar
tmen
t,S
FFD
)P
re-A
pplic
atio
n te
amle
ader
48ho
urs
to a
rran
gem
eetin
gTe
n da
ys to
con
duct
mee
ting
Acc
eptf
ees
for a
genc
ies
Lette
r of D
eter
min
atio
ndr
afte
d w
ithin
2 w
eeks
Lette
r may
be
appe
aled
thro
ugh
the
chai
n of
com
man
d to
Dire
ctor
8:00
AM
–5:
00 P
MC
all 8
-606
0 fro
mho
use
phon
eR
evie
w fo
rco
mpl
eten
ess
Iden
tify
othe
rpe
rmits
requ
ired
DB
I Cen
tral P
erm
itB
urea
u(1
st F
loor
)
8:00
AM
–4:
30 P
MTa
ke a
num
ber a
ndw
ait
Cus
tom
er p
ays
plan
chec
k fe
esP
uts
in b
info
rP
lann
ing
Dep
artm
ent
pick
up
Pla
nnin
g D
epar
tmen
t16
50 M
issi
onS
t.S
uite
400
8:00
AM
–5:
00P
MR
evie
w b
y P
lann
erVe
rifie
s th
at c
ondi
tions
of a
ppro
vala
re s
how
non
pla
ns
DB
I Pla
nR
evie
w S
ervi
ces
1660
Mis
sion
St.
2nd F
loor
Cle
rk o
f Pla
nnin
g D
epar
tmen
t del
iver
s to
DB
I
8:00
AM
–5:
00 P
MC
hief
Cle
rk g
ets
2 se
ts o
f sta
mpe
dpl
ans
and
othe
rdo
cum
ents
.Lo
gs in
on
Perm
it Tr
acki
ngS
yste
m (P
TS) o
n ar
rival
date
Put
s in
back
vau
ltW
orkl
oad
Man
ager
det
erm
ines
num
ber o
f hou
rs fo
r rev
iew
(for s
ite H
igh
Ris
e –
4 hr
s)D
eter
min
es n
ext a
vaila
ble
plan
revi
ewer
with
the
leas
tba
ck lo
gV
erifi
es ro
utin
g
Cal
ls a
pplic
ant t
o su
bmit
addi
tiona
l set
s of
pla
ns p
erro
utin
g
SFP
UC
1660
Mis
sion
St.,
1st F
loor
Pic
ks u
p fro
m b
inFe
es a
ssig
ned
CP
B16
60 M
issi
onS
t.,1st
Flo
or
For i
nclu
sion
ary
hous
ing
8:00
AM
–4:
30 P
MC
alcu
late
fina
l fee
sC
alcu
late
Sch
ool F
ees,
Cal
-OS
HA
, and
oth
er p
aym
entv
erifi
catio
nIf
ther
e ar
e in
clus
iona
ry fe
es, c
alls
City
Pla
nnin
g to
sig
nof
f and
if th
e P
lann
er is
not
avai
labl
e,ca
ll th
eir b
oss
to v
erify
the
fee
App
lican
t tak
es a
num
ber a
nd w
aits
SF
Uni
fied
Sch
ool
Dis
trict
, Cal
-OS
HA
,E
tc. .
..
Rec
eive
oth
erfe
es.
Mus
t go
to o
ther
Dep
t to
pay
Ret
urn
to D
BI t
opa
y is
suan
cefe
es
Site
Per
mit
Issu
ed w
ithno
Add
endu
mS
ched
ule
$
$
$B
egin
Add
endu
mS
ubm
ittal
15 C
alen
dar D
ayA
ppea
l Per
iod
(If n
ot p
ursu
ant t
o C
ondi
tiona
l Use
SFF
D16
60 M
issi
on S
t.,2nd
Flo
orD
BI P
lan
Rev
iew
Ser
vice
s16
60 M
issi
on S
t., 2
nd F
loor
DP
W -
BS
M16
60 M
issi
on S
t, 1st
Fl.
DPH
1390
Mar
ket S
t
Rev
iew
s, s
ends
out
plan
che
ckco
mm
ents
if n
eede
dto
app
lican
t, de
sign
prof
essi
onal
and
a
cour
tesy
fax
to p
lan
runn
erA
pplic
ant m
akes
Rec
heck
appo
intm
ent w
ithpl
an e
xam
iner
Pic
ks u
p da
ily fr
om 2
nd fl
oor b
inLo
gs in
to P
erm
it Tr
acki
ng S
yste
m (P
TS)
Rev
iew
sfo
r stre
et/s
idew
alk
gene
ral
issu
esA
pplic
ant g
oes
on s
epar
ate
appl
icat
ion
with
DP
W-B
UF
and
DP
W-B
SM
Turn
arou
nd ti
me
5 B
usin
ess
Day
sTe
llsap
plic
ant b
efor
ehan
d to
file
a fu
llse
tto
875
Ste
vens
on S
t. of
fice,
who
will
emai
l the
info
rmat
ion
back
to S
tatio
n4
DP
W-B
SM
sta
ff.
Pic
ksup
from
SFF
D b
inA
ssig
ned
Mon
. and
Tue
s.m
orni
ngA
ssig
n on
Per
mit
Trac
king
Sys
tem
(PTS
) acc
ordi
ng to
back
log
Turn
arou
nd ti
me
3-4
wee
ksfo
r Hig
h R
ise
Put
into
Pla
n R
evie
wer
’sbi
n(P
re a
pplic
atio
nco
vers
wat
erflo
w c
alcu
latio
ns, p
relim
inar
yS
mok
e co
ntro
l)
?
SFR
A1
Sou
th V
an N
ess,
5th fl
oor
Wis
hes
to b
e la
stfo
r rev
iew
/ap
prov
al o
n si
te
perm
it on
ly fo
rce
rtain
jobs
.
May
or’s
Offi
ce O
nD
isab
ility
401
Van
Nes
s,R
m 3
00
All p
erm
itsus
ing
any
publ
ic fu
nds
are
hand
car
ried
to M
ayor
's O
ffice
on
Dis
abili
ty fo
rre
view
RE
CH
EC
K A
PP
OIN
TME
NT
App
lican
t com
pile
s al
lsta
mpe
d se
ts in
to 2
set
s of
pla
nsA
nd c
oord
inat
es S
ign
Off
Par
ty
Rec
heck
app
oint
men
t is
mad
e w
ith th
e P
lan
Exa
min
erdi
rect
ly o
r with
DB
IPla
nR
evie
w S
ervi
ces
Sta
ffA
pplic
ant a
nd P
lan
Rev
iew
erm
eet a
nd g
o ov
er p
lans
toge
ther
If ok
ay, p
lan
exam
iner
stam
ps a
nd s
igns
off
Ifm
ore
chan
ges
need
to b
e m
ade,
App
lican
t mus
t mak
ech
ange
s, a
nd re
sche
dule
an
appo
intm
ent t
o m
eet a
gain
Sig
n O
ff “P
arty
”
Put
all
rech
eck
chan
ges
shee
ts to
DB
I Pla
n R
evie
w S
ervi
ces
DB
I Pla
n R
evie
w S
ervi
ces
1660
Mis
sion
St.,
2nd
Flo
or
Pla
nnin
gD
epar
tmen
tN
ot in
clus
iona
ryho
usin
g
SFR
A1
Sou
th V
an N
ess
Pro
ject
spo
nsor
file
sO
wne
r Par
ticip
atio
nA
gree
men
t
Planning DepartmentClerk picks up plans every dayCPB logs out on Permit Tracking System (PTS)Planning Departmentlogs in on Permit TrackingSystem(PTS)Route to quadrant team leader who already approvedfrom discretionaryreview/environmental (all beforesubmitting to DBI)Adds CPZOC on routing fir for inclusionary housing permits
Applicant returns withadditional sets
Dec
embe
r 200
7
BPR
– P
lan
Rev
iew
and
Per
mit
Issu
ance
Sub
com
mitt
ee T
o-B
e M
appi
ng:
Hig
h R
ise
– Si
te P
erm
it
KIO
SK
Sel
f che
ck-in
Aut
omat
ed c
usto
mer
track
ing
syst
em s
ends
to
nex
t sta
tion
(60
seco
nds
or le
ss)
REC
OR
DS
May
be
requ
este
d on
line
REG
ISTR
ATI
ON
Che
ck-in
Aut
omat
ed c
usto
mer
track
ing
syst
em s
ends
to
nex
t sta
tion
(60
seco
nds
or le
ss)
SFR
AAs
requ
ired
Staf
f rev
iew
pro
cess
Not
ifica
tions
Com
mis
sion
hea
rings
Appr
oval
sC
ompa
re w
ith p
revi
ous
appr
oval
s
PAY
FE
E @
C
ASH
IER
INIT
IAL
PER
MIT
REV
IEW
(IPR
)
Nam
e ca
lled
via
Aut
omat
ed c
usto
mer
track
ing
syst
emEs
tabl
ish
appr
oval
dis
cipl
ines
Det
erm
ine
cust
omer
rout
ing
Che
ck fo
rcom
plet
enes
sC
heck
forN
OV
Che
ck fo
rblo
ck a
nd lo
t/add
ress
Add
new
add
ress
to P
erm
it Tr
acki
ngSy
stem
(PTS
) if r
equi
red
Che
ckoc
cupa
ncy
clas
s, u
seD
eter
min
e fe
e va
luat
ion
Che
ck a
ppro
val o
f Gre
en R
ecyc
ling
Prog
ram
Che
ckB
usin
ess
Tax
Reg
istra
tion,
Wor
kers
Com
pens
atio
n, c
ontra
ctor
info
rmat
ion
DPW
-BSM
pre
limin
ary
revi
ewSF
FD s
taff
revi
ew fo
r con
form
ance
Plan
ning
Dep
artm
ent o
rSFR
Ast
aff
revi
ew fo
r gen
eral
con
form
ance
with
ac
com
pany
ing
subm
ittal
sIn
take
and
forw
ard
to P
lann
ing
Dep
artm
ent o
rSFR
AEn
ter R
adio
Fre
quen
cy Id
entif
icat
ion
(RFI
D) c
ode
to d
raw
ings
Che
ck fo
r eas
emen
tsId
entif
y in
PTS
this
is a
Con
ditio
nal-
Use
app
licat
ion
PRO
CES
SIN
G S
TATI
ON
Che
cks
draw
ings
to m
ake
sure
Plan
ning
Dep
artm
ent o
r SFR
A ha
s si
gned
off
Con
tact
s cu
stom
er fo
rpic
kup
Cus
tom
er p
icks
up
plan
s
Cus
tom
er s
uppl
ies
notif
icat
ion
lists
and
fo
rms
Pays
for o
r sup
plie
sen
velo
pes
and
mai
lings
– d
ual D
BI
and
Plan
ning
Dep
artm
ent
notif
icat
ions
Post
s N
otic
e
Plan
ning
Dep
artm
ent
CLE
RK
proc
esse
sno
tific
atio
n m
ater
ials
PLA
NN
ING
DEP
AR
TMEN
T
Ente
r int
o PT
S to
Qua
dran
tLe
ader
Qua
dran
t Lea
der h
olds
unt
il as
sign
ed p
lann
er is
read
y to
re
view
Plan
ning
Dep
artm
ent h
as C
lerk
proc
ess
notif
icat
ion
mat
eria
ls a
fter
appr
oval
and
pla
ces
on 3
0 ca
lend
ar d
ay h
old
once
not
ice
is
sent
out
Appo
intm
ents
for s
ubm
ittin
g C
U,
Varia
nce
or M
EA a
pplic
atio
ns to
the
Plan
ning
Dep
artm
ent w
ithin
two
wee
ks
PLA
NN
ING
DEP
AR
TMEN
TC
ount
er
Rec
eive
s pa
ymen
tR
evie
ws
subm
ittal
sE
nter
s in
fo in
to P
TSSe
ts c
alen
dar f
orhe
arin
g
ALL
CU
STO
MER
S
FREQ
UEN
TC
UST
OM
ERS
Yes,
ifre
ques
ted
Yes,
ifre
ques
ted
OB
TAIN
INFO
RM
ATI
ON
OR
AB
ATE
VIO
LATI
ON
S
Paym
ent f
orre
prod
uctio
nsre
quire
d?YE
S
Ret
urn
with
rece
ipt t
o co
llect
draw
ings
Pay
revi
ew fe
eR
etur
n w
ith re
ceip
t
Proc
eed
toad
dend
a.Pr
oces
s w
hen
read
y.
IF n
ot S
FRA
, to
PLA
NN
ING
DEP
AR
TMEN
T fo
r:D
iscr
etio
nary
Rev
iew
appl
icat
ion
Con
ditio
nal-U
se (C
U)
by a
ppoi
ntm
ent
Varia
nce
(by
appo
intm
ent
MEA
(man
dato
ry b
y ap
poin
tmen
t)G
ener
al in
form
atio
n
Ent
er in
to P
TSTr
ansf
er to
Pla
nnin
g D
epar
tmen
t
PRO
VID
E A
DD
ITIO
NA
L IN
FOR
MA
TIO
N O
R R
EVIS
ION
S
IF n
ot S
FRA
, to
PLA
NN
ING
DEP
AR
TMEN
T fo
r:D
iscr
etio
nary
Rev
iew
app
licat
ion
Con
ditio
nal-U
se (C
U) b
y ap
poin
tmen
tVa
rianc
e (b
y ap
poin
tmen
t)M
EA
(man
dato
ry b
y ap
poin
tmen
t)G
ener
al in
form
atio
n
SFR
AIf
requ
ired
prio
r to
subm
ittal
ENH
AN
CED
SER
VIC
ES F
OR
AD
DIT
ION
AL
FEES
Som
e ad
dend
a m
ay b
e su
bmitt
edpr
ior t
o si
te p
erm
it ap
prov
al
Ente
rs to
PTS
. Tr
ansf
erto
SFR
A
STA
RT
Man
dato
ry p
re-
appl
icat
ion
conf
eren
ce w
ithal
l age
ncie
s
Fill
out e
lect
roni
cap
plic
atio
n on
line
or a
t Per
mit
Cen
teri
f abl
e at
cust
omer
are
a
FIN
ISH
FIN
ISH
HEL
P D
ESK
Cod
e qu
estio
nsPr
oces
s qu
estio
nsPo
licie
s an
d pr
oced
ures
Rej
ect /
Fu
rthe
rin
fone
eded
Rej
ect /
Fu
rthe
rin
fone
eded
Perm
it hi
stor
y re
quire
d?
Perm
it hi
stor
yre
quire
d?
NO
Proc
eed
to IP
R
NO
Lim
ited
DB
Iand
SFFD
revi
ew fo
r site
per
mit
only
Fina
lPla
nnin
gD
epar
tmen
tapp
rova
l
Tran
sfer
with
inon
e bu
sine
ss d
ay
Pub
lic H
earin
g re
quire
d.Ap
prov
al, D
isap
prov
alor
Rev
isio
ns re
quire
d
Rej
ect /
Fu
rthe
rre
visi
ons
need
ed
APP
RO
VED
PLA
NN
ING
DEP
AR
TMEN
T R
EVIE
W O
NLY
PRO
VID
E R
EVIS
ION
S, IF
REQ
UIR
ED
Not
App
rove
d
App
rove
d
PLA
NN
ING
DEP
AR
TMEN
T R
EVIE
W O
NLY
December 2007 Page 66
J. NEW HIGH RISE – ADDENDUM “As-Is” Mapping Issues:
• Order of review by different agencies is uncertain. • Rechecking of documents among agencies; limited coordination among agencies. • Limited coordination of recheck appointments and collating drawings for final review. • Limited tracking of drawings. • No guaranteed turnaround times. • Unclear addendum process for soon to be approved permits.
“To-Be” Mapping Narrative:
1. Full submittal sets: parallel plan review: customer is notified number of sets
required, based on routing. Customer brings copy of approved site permit.
a. IPR Permit Technician is responsible for checking for completeness of addendum submittal and that it matches approved site permit.
b. Turnaround times for first set of plan review comments after initial plan review to be within established turnaround times on a case-by-case basis (See Performance Measures Subcommittee Report for specific project descriptions).
c. Recheck appointments to be scheduled with original plan reviewer within three business days from day of request.
d. Customer to control rechecks with original plan reviewer when ready for all disciplines.
2. Help Desk is available for general questions and procedures for all categories listed
below.
a. Obtaining records. b. Registration or self help kiosk (no more than 60 seconds), routed to records
station. c. Triage and recheck appointments, non-DBI submittals, records, applications
(example: Planning conditional use or variance applications). d. Registration or self help kiosk (no more than 60 seconds), routed to station.
3. Customer responsible for obtaining sign-offs from each station, collating drawings
to make two approved sets. 4. IPR Permit Technician at Permit Issuance Station verifies that all stations have
approved the drawings. 5. Permit Technician at Permit Issuance Station determines final plan review
valuation and sends customer to cashier for final permit fee payment and to obtain permit and job card. While applicant pays fee, Permit Technician stamps drawings. Customer returns with permit, job card and receipt from cashier and collects drawings.
8:00
AM
–3:
45 P
MC
usto
mer
sig
ns in
Sr.
Pla
n E
xam
iner
che
cks
for
com
plet
enes
s ba
sed
on w
hat y
our
subm
ittal
nee
ds –
nec
essa
rydo
cum
ents
, ref
eren
ce d
raw
ings
, cop
yof
Site
Per
mit
Pac
kage
for E
ACH
adde
ndum
with
num
ber o
f set
s fo
rnu
mbe
r of s
tatio
ns.
Atta
ches
Add
endu
m c
ard,
Ver
ifies
cor
rect
rout
ing
Sta
mps
and
logs
into
PTS
App
lican
t sig
ns a
dden
daca
rdIf
appl
ican
t brin
gs le
ss s
ets
than
the
num
ber o
f sta
tions
, the
y ca
n br
ing
itla
ter.
8:00
AM
–5:
00 P
MTa
ke a
num
ber (
5 –
60 m
in. w
ait)
Che
ck e
ntitl
emen
tsV
erify
pro
perty
info
on
Pla
nnin
gD
epar
tmen
t dat
abas
e.If
hist
oric
al, c
usto
mer
mus
t tal
k to
a
hist
oric
al p
rese
rvat
ioni
st –
his
toric
alpr
eser
vatio
nist
sar
e on
ly a
t the
cou
nter
2.5
hour
s pe
r day
.C
heck
BB
N,P
lann
ing
viol
atio
n,½
fee,
et
c.Id
entif
y Pl
anne
r for
rout
ing
If ok
, ini
tial A
CC
EPT
on ro
utin
g sl
ip
Site
Per
mit
Issu
ed
DB
I Int
ake
Cou
nter
1660
Mis
sion
St.
4th F
loor
App
lican
t ret
urns
with
min
imum
2se
ts o
f pla
ns w
ith c
lear
ly m
arke
dco
ver s
heet
say
ing
wha
t the
yar
e su
bmitt
ing
for
Pla
nnin
g D
epar
tmen
tIn
form
atio
n C
ount
er (P
IC)
(1st
Floo
r Sta
tion
1)
Aug
ust 2
4, 2
007
BPR
-Pl
an R
evie
w a
nd P
erm
it Is
suan
ce S
ubco
mm
ittee
As-
Is M
appi
ng: N
ew H
igh
Ris
e -A
dden
dum
If thereare changes to the SitePermit that impactPlanning Department, must be routedto Planning Department.
DB
I Pla
nR
evie
w S
ervi
ces
1660
Mis
sion
St.
2nd F
loor
Inte
rnal
Rou
ting
No
Cha
nges
to S
ite
8:00
AM
–4:
45 P
MA
rriv
es in
bac
kva
ult
Wor
kloa
dM
anag
er d
eter
min
es n
umbe
r of h
ours
for
revi
ewD
eter
min
es n
ext a
vaila
ble
Plan
Exa
min
erw
ith th
ele
ast b
ack
log
Ver
ifies
rout
ing
If ad
ditio
nal s
ets
are
need
ed,
Cal
lsap
plic
ant t
o su
bmit
per r
outin
g
DB
I Stru
ctur
al P
lan
Rev
iew
1660
Mis
sion
St.,
2nd
Flo
or
RE
CH
EC
K A
PP
OIN
TME
NT
Rec
heck
app
oint
men
t is
mad
e w
ithth
e st
aff
App
lican
t and
Pla
n E
xam
iner
mee
t and
go
over
pla
ns to
geth
erIf
okay
, Pla
n E
xam
iner
sta
mps
and
sig
ns o
ffIf
mor
e ch
ange
sne
edto
be
mad
e, A
pplic
ant m
ust m
ake
chan
ges,
and
resc
hedu
lean
appo
intm
ent t
o m
eeta
gain
If there aremajor changes,MUSTsubmit alternative Site Permit
DB
I Pla
n R
evie
w S
ervi
ces
staf
f ver
ifies
all
need
ed s
tam
psfro
m o
ther
div
isio
ns a
nd d
epar
tmen
ts.
WO
RK
UN
DE
RW
AY
DB
IPla
n R
evie
w S
ervi
ces
1660
Mis
sion
St.,
2nd
Flo
or
App
lican
t ret
urns
with
add
ition
alse
ts
No
resp
onse
Upo
n ex
pira
tion
date
,ap
plic
ant i
s se
nt a
w
arni
ng le
tter.
Ove
r the
Cou
nter
(See
OTC
with
Pla
ns M
ap)
If O
TCS
eria
l Rev
iew
Cancelled by CPB uponrequest of Plan Examiner
Exp
ires
in …
(fro
m h
old
date
):$1
~ $
99,9
99 –
39 C
alen
dar
Day
s$1
00K
~ $
1 M
illio
n –
69C
alen
dar D
ays
$1 M
illio
n+ 9
9 C
alen
dar
Day
s
Pay
s E
xten
sion
Fee
of $
32.8
0w
ith D
BI P
RS
on
2nd F
loor
SFF
D16
60 M
issi
onS
t.,2nd
Flo
orD
BI S
truct
ural
Pla
n R
evie
w16
60 M
issi
on S
t., 2
nd F
loor
DPW
-BS
M16
60 M
issi
on S
t.
DP
H13
90 M
arke
t St
Rev
iew
s, s
ends
out
pl
an c
heck
com
men
tsif
need
ed to
app
lican
t,de
sign
pro
fess
iona
lan
da
cour
tesy
fax
topl
an ru
nner
App
lican
t mak
esR
eche
ck a
ppoi
ntm
ent
with
Pla
nE
xam
iner
Pic
ksup
dai
ly fr
om 2
nd fl
oorb
inLo
gs in
to P
TSR
evie
ws
for s
treet
/sid
ewal
k ge
nera
l iss
ues
App
lican
tgoe
s on
sep
arat
e ap
plic
atio
n w
ithB
UF
and
BSM
if th
ere
istre
e an
d la
ndsc
ape
Turn
arou
nd ti
me
5 B
usin
ess
Day
sTe
lls a
pplic
ant b
efor
ehan
d to
file
a fu
ll se
t to
875
Ste
vens
on S
t. of
fice,
who
will
emai
l the
info
rmat
ion
back
to S
tatio
n nu
mbe
r4 B
SM
staf
f.
Pic
ks u
p fro
m S
FFD
bin
Ass
igne
d M
on.a
nd T
ues.
mor
ning
Ass
ign
on P
TSac
cord
ing
to
back
log
Turn
arou
nd ti
me
3-4
wee
ksfo
r Hig
h R
ise
Put
into
Pla
n E
xam
iner
’sbi
n(P
re-a
pplic
atio
n co
vers
wat
erflo
w c
alcu
latio
ns,p
relim
inar
yS
mok
e co
ntro
l)
?
SFR
A1
Sou
thV
an N
ess,
5th fl
oor
Wis
hes
to b
e la
stfo
r rev
iew
/ap
prov
al o
n si
te
perm
it on
lyfo
rce
rtain
jobs
.
May
or’s
Offi
ce O
nD
isab
ility
401
Van
Nes
s, R
m 3
00
All p
erm
itsus
ing
any
publ
ic fu
nds
are
hand
carr
ied
to M
OD
for r
evie
w
Appl
ican
t com
pile
s al
l wor
king
sta
mpe
d se
ts in
to2
sets
of f
inal
pla
nsP
uts
all r
eche
ck c
hang
es s
heet
s to
geth
er
DBI
Mec
hani
cal P
lan
Rev
iew
1660
Mis
sion
St.,
2nd
Flo
or
DP
W B
SM
1660
Mis
sion
St,
1st F
loor
SFF
D16
60 M
issi
on S
t.,2nd
Flo
or
DB
I Mec
hani
cal P
lan
Rev
iew
1660
Mis
sion
St.,
2nd
Flo
or
Rev
iew
s fo
r M
echa
nica
lC
ode
Com
plia
nce
Par
alle
l Rev
iew
with
Mul
tiple
Set
s of
Pla
nsan
d co
pies
of p
erm
it ap
plic
atio
nR
oute
d to
app
ropr
iate
sta
tions
Sign
Off
Part
ies
It is
then
the
appl
ican
t'sre
spon
sibi
lity
to c
onta
ct th
e in
divi
dual
dep
artm
ents
for f
inal
sign
off
mee
tings
, onc
e al
lof
the
plan
che
ck c
omm
ents
hav
e be
en a
ddre
ssed
.
Put
all r
eche
ck c
hang
essh
eets
to D
BI P
RS
DB
I Cen
tral P
erm
it B
urea
u16
60 M
issi
onS
t, 1st
Flo
or
No
Res
pons
e
Applicant brings additional sets and copies of permit application
Responsible fordistribution
Inco
mpl
ete.
Fax
Com
men
ts to
App
lican
t.A
pplic
ant s
ubm
its o
n 2nd
floo
r*M
akes
sur
e th
e ch
ange
sdo
esno
t con
flict
with
oth
er a
genc
ies
DP
W-B
SM
875
Ste
vens
on
DP
W-B
UF
Cal
l 641
-264
6
Recheck Appointment
Rec
heck
Appo
intm
ent
Rev
ised
pla
n ro
uted
inte
rnal
ly
Type
s of
Add
endu
ms:
Fou
ndat
ion
Sup
erst
ruct
ure
Arc
hite
ctur
al M
echa
nica
l/ E
lect
rical
/P
lum
bing
(in
clud
es S
mok
eC
ontro
l) E
xter
iorW
all
Spr
inkl
er /
SFF
D A
larm
Brin
gs re
vise
d pl
ans
for D
PW
BS
M
*Fo
r eac
h ad
dend
umsu
bmitt
al
Dec
embe
r 200
7
BPR
– P
lan
Rev
iew
and
Per
mit
Issu
ance
Sub
com
mitt
ee T
o-B
e M
appi
ng:
Hig
h R
ise
-Add
endu
m
KIO
SK
Sel
f che
ck-in
Aut
omat
ed c
usto
mer
track
ing
syst
em s
ends
to
next
sta
tion
(60
seco
nds
or le
ss)
REC
OR
DS
May
be re
ques
ted
onlin
e
REG
ISTR
ATI
ON
Che
ck-in
Auto
mat
ed c
usto
mer
track
ing
syst
em s
ends
to
next
sta
tion
(60
seco
nds
or le
ss)
PA
Y F
EE
@C
ASH
IER
PA
Y F
EE
@C
ASH
IER
INIT
IAL
PER
MIT
REV
IEW
(IPR
)
Nam
e ca
lled
via
Aut
omat
edcu
stom
er tr
acki
ng s
yste
mEs
tabl
ish
appr
oval
dis
cipl
ines
Det
erm
ine
cust
omer
rout
ing
Che
ck fo
r com
plet
enes
sVe
rify
mat
ch w
ith a
ppro
ved
site
perm
itD
PW-B
SM re
view
Ente
r Rad
io F
requ
ency
iden
tific
atio
n (R
FID
) cod
e to
dr
awin
gsPl
ace
draw
ings
and
sub
mitt
als
in
appr
opria
tebi
ns fo
r tra
nsfe
r to
stat
ions
PER
MIT
ISSU
AN
CE
STA
TIO
N
Che
cks
draw
ings
to m
ake
sure
all
sign
offs
are
com
plet
eD
eter
min
e fin
al v
alua
tion
Send
s cu
stom
er to
cas
hier
whi
ledr
awin
gs a
re s
tam
ped
Appr
oved
Cus
tom
er c
olla
tes
appr
oved
dra
win
gs to
pr
oduc
e tw
o fin
alap
prov
ed s
ets.
DB
I Str
uctu
ral
Plan
Rev
iew
May
be
reje
cted
if n
ot
code
com
plia
ntIf
chan
ges
requ
ired,
each
sta
tion
notif
ies
cust
omer
per
corre
ctio
nsC
usto
mer
mak
es
rech
eck
appo
intm
ent
for e
ach
stat
ion
with
sign
off
at m
eetin
g, if
ap
prov
ed
ALL
CU
STO
MER
S
FREQ
UEN
T C
UST
OM
ERS
Yes,
ifre
ques
ted
Yes,
ifre
ques
ted
CO
MPL
ETE
SUB
MIT
TAL
OR
OB
TAIN
MO
RE
INFO
RM
ATI
ON
Paym
ent f
orre
prod
uctio
nsre
quire
d?YE
SR
etur
n w
ithre
ceip
t to
colle
ctdr
awin
gs
Pay
revi
ew fe
eR
etur
n w
ithre
ceip
t
Issu
e pe
rmit
and
job
card
. R
etur
n to
pick
up
appr
oved
stam
ped
draw
ings
MEC
HA
NIC
AL
SFPU
C
SFR
A
DPH
DPW
-BSM
SFFD
MO
D
Sep
arat
e pe
rmit(
s)re
quire
dD
oes
not h
old
up
appr
oval
sFi
nal i
nspe
ctio
nre
quire
s pe
rmit
appr
oval
s
Not
e: M
ultip
le a
dden
da s
ubm
ittal
sal
low
ed, r
epea
ting
this
pro
cess
as n
eces
sary
Not
e: E
nhan
ced
serv
ices
ava
ilabl
e fo
r add
ition
alfe
e–
all s
tatio
ns
STA
RT
Cus
tom
er b
rings
appr
oved
site
perm
it se
tor l
ette
rof
aut
horiz
atio
n to
proc
eed
from
DB
ID
irect
or a
ndm
ultip
le a
dden
dase
ts.
(By
appo
intm
ent,
man
dato
ry)
FIN
ISH
HEL
P D
ESK
Cod
e qu
estio
nsPr
oces
s qu
estio
nsPo
licie
s an
d pr
oced
ures
Rej
ect /
Fu
rthe
rin
fone
eded
Per
mit
hist
ory
requ
ired?
Per
mit
hist
ory
requ
ired?
Plan
ning
Dep
artm
ent r
evie
wan
d ap
prov
al
Is it
iden
tical
to a
ppro
ved
site
perm
it?
YES
NO
IPR
to: Col
lect
mul
tiple
copi
es o
f pla
nsfro
m c
usto
mer
Set u
p ro
utin
glo
catio
ns a
nd
sequ
ence
Rou
te p
lans
to
disc
iplin
esD
eter
min
etu
rnar
ound
tim
es
Dis
cipl
ine
supe
rvis
or to
es
timat
e re
view
hour
sTu
rnar
ound
tim
esm
arke
d on
pla
nsPl
ans
assi
gned
to
staf
f
Plan
s de
liver
ed to
disc
iplin
es w
ithin
one
busi
ness
day
AFT
ER P
LAN
NIN
G D
EPA
RTM
ENT
APP
RO
VAL
App
rove
d
NO
Proc
eed
to IP
R
NO
If te
nant
dis
plac
emen
t, 15
cal
enda
rda
y ho
ld, o
nce
fees
pai
d
NO
FIN
ISH
Hol
d re
quire
d?YE
S
App
rove
d
December 2007 Page 69
INSPECTIONS SUBCOMMITTEE
REPORT
December 2007 Page 70
INSPECTIONS SUBCOMMITTEE CTIONS SUBCOMMITTEE
The Inspections Subcommittee examined current practices of securing inspections, how the responsibilities are coordinated among city agency, and where changes to the process should be made to increase efficiencies and improve customer service without sacrificing safety. These goals were accomplished with ““As-Is” and “To-Be” maps, accompanied by both findings and over 55 recommendations. I. SWOT ANALYSIS
Strengths • Customer service. • Sensitive to issues. • Uniform enforcement. • Gives good communication. • Uniform code enforcement. • Public notification at website and online. • Responsive to complaints, provides follow-up and closure. • Provides in-house and outreach training/presentation. • Keep up with changing technology that is very informative and is available to the
public. • Keeps list of code articles and gives as handouts at the counter and in the field. • Staff is helpful and knowledgeable on code and policies. • Live response when contacted over the phone. • Excellent and dedicated support staff. • Easy application process and instant issuance of electrical and plumbing, online.
This process is approximately 10 minutes. • Electrical off-hours inspection scheduling available online (but not for regular
inspection scheduling). • Clients are asked if they wish to be contacted to attend training while filing
application at CPB. • Emergency response. DPW and DBI work closely in emergency response. Staff
members are contacted based on availability. Respond within 20 minutes, coordinating with SFFD, calling senior staff, utility companies, among others.
• After-hours overtime inspections available. • Good inter-relations and cooperation with other agencies. • Ability to contact inspector directly for any issues related to permit. • There is smooth changeover when someone comes in with a complaint as there is
actual person to deal with and not automated. • Records available to the public. • Be able to talk to senior staff and management for second opinion.
December 2007 Page 71
• Able to speak to inspector and having a point of contact. • Easy access for public to file complaints. Approximately 33% of complaints are filed
online. • Highly efficient. • Back-up staff.
Weaknesses
• Maintenance of city vehicles. Although this is outside of DBI’s control it impacts schedule and production. The challenge is to improve vehicle availability to improve service.
• Multiple inspections for scope of work.
• Unclear final inspection, Certificate of Final Completion and Occupancy, Temporary Certificate of Occupancy policies.
• Scheduling and rescheduling inspections adversely impact other appointments.
• Customer encounters problems when calling at designated time of 7:30 AM to 8:30 AM. Line is always busy.
• Ratio of inspectors vs. inspection requests, not enough staff to cover all inspection requests.
• Complaint investigations not only made to the department, but at the Mayor’s Office and/or Board of Supervisors.
• Unable to update inspector when customers would call to cancel or reschedule appointments.
• More training made available to all city staff.
• Need more parking spaces.
• Insufficient parking available in the field. Inspectors run into issues (e.g. time, parking ticket).
• Access to inspection site are not considered when scheduling inspections and in the time frame.
• Inability to schedule regular and overtime building inspections online.
• Cannot apply for two applications at the same time, with online permitting must logout and login.
• Quality of DBI staff is overlooked.
• Inconsistent interpretations in the field.
• Coordination among departments. Received public complaints regarding the need for electrical and plumbing, street-space (public right-of-way) excavation coordination. The contractor ends up with NOV. It is a common problem as not everyone is familiar with DPW rules, especially with complex projects.
• Coordination sequence of inspections among various disciplines is unclear.
December 2007 Page 72
• Permit issuance scheduling.
• Not meeting two business days turnaround times for inspections.
• Method of scheduling inspection varies across city agencies. Scheduling of inspection need better consistency (guideline on how to make the call, who to call/clerical staff).
• Inability to use technology in the field so you do not have to come back to the office to update status of permit and input other information.
• Redundant inspections.
• Customer preparedness for inspection at job site – time loss; incomplete file/missing documents resulting in delay by inspector and inability to close job. Customer should keep track of all records/documents and have them ready at time of inspection.
• Lack of accurate existent “conditions” on job site, this depends on customers’ information.
• Multi-agencies coordination – for large projects, different agencies (SFPUC, DPW, others), either public or private, may have jurisdictions over the site.
• Site conditions do not meet plans and delays work. Public right-of-way often neglected or forgotten.
• Forms and handouts not updated consistently.
• Inconsistencies among inspectors illustrate the need for written guidelines. On question of revisions, sometimes inspectors would settle for just a letter from the engineer, other times inspector would require a permit. Requirements are inconsistent depending on field conditions and changes.
• Multiple permit numbers for changing scopes of work.
• Renewal permit numbers clogs the system. Documentation should reflect what design approval is, not what it was initially applied/filed.
• Plumbing and electrical permits, 90 calendar day expiration limit.
• Lack of notification of expiring permits.
• When calling for code questions and/or complaints, DBI inspection telephone lines timeframe for requesting inspections is too limited.
• Premature calls for inspection wastes time. This is a tactic used by general contractors to put pressure on sub-contractors and results in uncoordinated efforts, job is not ready yet.
• Lack of communication between client and inspector, if and when there is a change in field conditions. Sometimes, if inspector is sick or on vacation and there are no staff back-ups.
• Process of obtaining duplicate copy of permits is not widely known by public.
• SFFD delay in responses due to various reasons including contact person not available, access issue, contractor not available, no approved drawings.
December 2007 Page 73
• Permits on hold due to other issues - inconsistency on another permit. Building owner compliance issues/multiple unrelated violations, but affect a contractor who may not be involved in work with violation. Alert contractor early of existing conditions that owner has not addressed or not compliant, inspector cannot just sign-off/approve work.
• Job site may be more complex than scope of work approved. Scope of work may be incorrect.
• Customer may have obtained the wrong type of permit due to process being too complex or did not know what permit to get.
• The permit and inspection processes do not distinguish between frequent and infrequent customers.
• Correction Notice issued because of inconsistencies.
• Communication and outreach can be enhanced.
• Customer held responsible for coordination of inspection sequences.
• Time management should be better.
• After work has been inspected, other parties disrupt previously approved work thereby requiring multiple inspections.
• Lack of inspection coordination when job site has multiple work/inspections, especially when scope of work is revised.
• Lack of communication between office and in the field in the scheduling process, such as running late, etc.
Opportunities
• Automate current inspection and related processes. • Public and neighborhood-specific outreach such as workshops, summits, brown
bags, open-house, or town hall meeting. • Training. • Frequently update informational handouts on procedures, checklists, and other
publications. • Update policies and procedures regularly.
Threats
• Budget, economy, staffing levels. • Political input. • Lack of succession planning. Institutional knowledge lost due to inspectors
retiring. • Automation (computers/telecommunication) crash during emergency. • New legislation. • Workload and new demands. Current staffing vs. anticipated staffing levels to
accommodate changes.
December 2007 Page 74
• Code adoptions/cycles; learning curve for new code.
December 2007 Page 75
II. ANALYSIS OF BENCHMARKING SURVEY AND STAKEHOLDER SURVEY
Benchmarking Survey from Other Cities Of the 31 jurisdictions that were contacted, representatives from six responded, and only one was within California.
The respondents were from:
• Montreal, Quebec, Canada • St. Paul, Minnesota • Honolulu, Hawaii • Portland, Oregon • Miami, Florida • Los Angeles, California
Findings:
1. Majority of responding cities (nearly 80%) had a one business day turnaround time for inspections. Remainder met two business days turnaround time.
2. Most responding cities utilize Integrated Voice Recognition (IVR) scheduling systems,
mixed with online scheduling and personal calls.
3. All provide overtime inspections.
4. Nearly 70% of responding cities employ “combo” (building, electrical and plumbing) inspectors.
Stakeholders Survey from Customers
We received a total of 50 stakeholder surveys. • 14 of the 50 were general contractors:
o 11 of the 50 were permit consultants/plan runners
• Remaining 25 participants were: o Owner/builder o Architects o Electrical contractors o Plumbing contractors o Homeowners o Unknown
• General profile of stakeholders included: o More than 80% used DBI Inspection Services more than five times during the past
year, i.e., frequent customers/users of inspection services.
December 2007 Page 76
o Most utilized inspection services over the previous 30 days from when the survey was taken.
Findings:
1. Lack of consistency in code interpretations among inspectors. 2. Lack of consistency among inspection divisions.
3. Demand for more online inspection services. 4. Failure to meet 48-hour turnaround time to do inspections. 5. Tendency for field inspectors to ignore plan review decisions.
December 2007 Page 77
III. INSPECTION SUBCOMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS
A. INSPECTIONS: OVERALL PROCESS
1. Centralize and automate inspection scheduling for all disciplines, with option to contact inspector through:
a. Integrated Voice Recognition System (IVR) b. Online / website c. In-person
2. Create hybrid scheduling system, partly automated for inspection time slots with supervisors allocating assignments day of, to sustain needed flexibility (inspector calls to confirm).
3. Automated system to screen types of inspections; identify how many of what types are needed on any given day. (Different inspections require varying lengths of time.)
4. New system must have ability to assign time slots/hours for coordinated inspections among all agencies.
5. Automate permit applications, revisions, expirations numbering system (one master permit application number).
6. Assign an inspector at inspection counter from 7:30 AM to 5:00 PM to answer technical questions, requests for information, etc. for all disciplines.
7. Inspection turnaround time. Goal is one business day to two business days, implemented in two-stage process:
a. Immediate goal: two business days from time when call is received. b. Long-term goal: one business day from time when call is received.
8. All city agencies to adhere to response time, hours and methods of inspections. 9. DPW-BSM also to meet two business days inspection turnaround times on street
improvements/street space and sidewalk issues.
10. Mayor’s Office on Disability to meet two business days inspection turnaround.
December 2007 Page 78
B. POLICY ISSUES 1. Develop and implement policy to streamline small residential remodel permits and inspections. 2. Develop and implement a policy to handle fee reduction requests, allowing customers to go through DBI established process (Director’s Hearing or In-house Committee), before going to Board of Permit Appeals (BPA).
3. Develop and implement a policy/guideline that no DBI sheetrock inspection be required for unrated wall assemblies.
4. Intake and Over-The-Counter plan review to have discretion eliminate old complaints upon review so long as these actions are discussed with other divisions involved prior to complaint elimination.
5. Expirations:
a. Create new policy/process to alert inspector when permit expires; tied to automation with trigger mechanism to generate notice letter. b. Change 90 calendar days electrical and plumbing permit expiration to 180 calendar days (all stand-alone permits to expire 180 calendar days). c. Tie electrical and plumbing permits to associated building permit expiration date.
6. Requests for re-inspection: Fees to be paid by permit holder. 7. Rename “$1 Permit” (actually $140) as “Final Only” permit.
8. Provide letter from general contractor that certifies insulation has been installed and meet code requirements or State insulation certification.
9. Building Inspection Division is final discipline to sign-off before cover-up and final.
10. Building Inspection Division is the responsible discipline for SFFD-stopping
inspection, caulking, and fire-rated assemblies at cover-up and final inspection. SFFD will also make a notation on card.
11. Plumbing and Electrical Inspection Divisions are responsible for buildings that do not require building inspections.
12. Given complexities of modern life-safety systems, keep Electrical Inspection Division and SFFD involved in fire alarm inspection to provide different expertise.
December 2007 Page 79
13. Building Inspector to confirm building height. If Building Inspector is not satisfied, contractor to provide survey.
14. Plumbing Inspectors to inspect heating ducts, flues and vents; Building Inspectors to continue to inspect all “environmental air,” such as bathroom fans, kitchen hood vents, dryer ventilation, etc.
15. Move block and lot maps out of Central Permit Bureau (CPB) drawers and make available online.
16. Single point-of-payment (cashier) for inspection-related issues. Includes other agencies.
C. SAN FRANCISCO FIRE DEPARTMENT
1. Fire sprinkler/new service on pipes one-foot beyond property line to be inspected either by Plumbing Inspection Division or SFFD. 2. Fire Sprinkler Inspections: SFFD shall inspect the complete fire system. Plumbing Inspection Division to inspect pipe size, supports, seismic bracing, back flow protection and underground piping.
3. Fire inspector to make decision for exit sign locations at rough and final inspections.
4. Only Fire inspector signs off on fire alarm locations.
5. Expand outreach programs to educate/homeowners using handouts, mailings and online access. Include San Francisco Customer Service Center “311” to help respond to basic questions.
6. Provide automated services in other languages, such as Chinese and Spanish.
7. Ways to manage problem with inspector:
a. Use “Guaranteed Second Opinion”. b. Document complaints. c. Reassign project to another inspector at manager’s discretion. DBI to establish
timeframe when to act. 8. Board of Appeals (BPA) cases to be heard within 45 calendar days.
9. Municipal Transportation Agency (MTA) - Department of Parking and Traffic (DPT) to issue permits within two business days and enforce its own policies.
December 2007 Page 80
10. DPW - Bureau of Urban Forestry (BUF) to relocate office for easy public access, better services and to meet two business days inspection turnaround time.
D. CITY INSPECTION VEHICLES
1. Utilize outside service garage as an option to expedite city vehicle repair and
maintenance. 2. Recommend discussions with DPT to ensure cooperation concerning parking of
city inspection vehicles. E. TASK FORCES
Special task forces are required to develop and implement the following recommendations.
1. Have only two final copies of plans with approvals/sign-offs from all city reviewing
agencies; client responsibility to obtain all required signatures. Establish criteria and policies.
2. Update and revise job card.
3. Review, approval, and record retention of revisions and field changes to approved plans.
4. Tower crane permits.
5. Develop specific work scope conditions requiring pre-construction meetings with
DBI, DPW, and other required agencies.
6. Establish performance standard for condominium conversion map and Physical Inspection Reports between DBI and DPW-BSM.
7. Resolve street vaults’ conflicts/issues with DBI, Planning Department, Office of
the City Attorney and PG&E.
8. Streamline garage door permit process (DBI and Planning Department).
9. DBI Task Force on Special Inspections has been established to ensure construction quality. Goal is to set up a separate inspection unit where special inspections are audited and special inspectors are certified.
December 2007 Page 81
IV. MAPPING
The following maps illustrate the inspection process; these maps are:
• Appeals Process • Inspection Scheduling • New Construction (Residential / Commercial) • Revisions – New Structural, Envelope Changes, Architectural • Overlapping Inspections • Condominium Conversion DBI, Two-Unit Owner Occupied Condominium • Conversions and Two to Six-Unit Condominium Conversions (Lottery Winners)
Each map has a separate introduction outlining each individual process.
December 2007 Page 82
A. APPEALS
There are four separate appeals processes in the map;
Planning Commission, Board of Supervisors, Board of Permit Appeals and Building Inspection Commission. The general process after permit issuance is to be appealed to the Board of Permit Appeals – in certain circumstances a permit holder may be appealed to the following commissions and boards: The Board of Supervisors, the Building Inspection Commission and the Planning Commission.
BU
ILD
ING
PER
MIT
App
licat
ion
isD
enie
d
Aug
ust 7
, 200
7
BPR
– In
spec
tions
Sub
com
mitt
ee A
s-Is
Map
ping
-A
ppea
ls
Clie
nt fi
les
App
eal w
ith e
ither
:
PLA
NN
ING
DEP
AR
TMEN
T/C
OM
MIS
SIO
NB
OA
RD
OF
SUPE
RVI
SOR
S
Proc
ess:
Perm
it re
-inst
ated
Beg
in W
ork
AC
TIO
N:
Type
ofa
ctio
ns -
issu
ance
, rev
isio
ns,
revo
catio
ns -
susp
ende
d,pe
ndin
g he
arin
gV
aria
nce
309
– to
Bur
eau
ofA
rchi
tect
ure
BO
AR
D O
F PE
RM
ITA
PPEA
LS P
roce
ss:
Appe
al a
n ac
tion
Sche
dule
hea
ring
(with
in3
mon
ths)
BU
ILD
ING
INSP
ECTI
ON
CO
MM
ISSI
ON
Plan
ning
Dep
artm
ent A
ppea
lsPr
oces
s:A
ppel
lant
sub
mits
app
eal
Staf
f ent
ers
info
rmat
ion
Plan
ner b
riefs
dep
artm
ent
repr
esen
tativ
e on
cas
e is
sues
Hea
ring
held
to re
view
app
eal
IfD
epar
tmen
t uph
eld
hear
ing
resu
lts, s
taff
ente
rsin
form
atio
n or
Boa
rdof
App
eals
dat
abas
eIf
Plan
ning
ove
rtur
ned,
sta
ffen
ters
info
rmat
ion
or B
oard
of
App
eals
dat
abas
ePl
anne
r im
plem
ents
App
eal
deci
sion
and
mod
ifies
NSR
if
requ
ired
App
lican
t rec
ords
new
NSR
ifre
quire
dD
ecis
ion
App
rove
dD
enie
d
Dec
isio
nD
ecis
ion
Dec
isio
n
App
rove
dD
enie
dA
ppro
ved
Den
ied
App
rove
dD
enie
d
Plan
ner i
mpl
emen
tsA
ppea
l dec
isio
n
App
lican
t may
file
appe
al w
ith B
oard
of
Perm
it A
ppea
ls
Proc
ess:
Perm
it re
-inst
ated
Beg
in w
ork
DEC
ISIO
N U
PHEL
DD
ECIS
ION
UPH
ELD
DEC
ISIO
N U
PHEL
D
BU
ILD
ING
PER
MIT
Issu
ed
Dec
embe
r 200
7
BPR
– In
spec
tions
Sub
com
mitt
ee T
o-B
e M
appi
ng -
App
eals
App
eal f
iled
with
eith
er:
PLA
NN
ING
DEP
AR
TMEN
T/C
OM
MIS
SIO
NB
OA
RD
OF
SUPE
RVI
SOR
S
Proc
ess:
Perm
it re
-inst
ated
Beg
in W
ork
AC
TIO
NTy
pe o
f act
ions
-is
suan
ce, r
evis
ions
,re
voca
tions
-su
spen
ded,
pen
ding
hear
ing
Varia
nce
309
– to
Bur
eau
ofA
rchi
tect
ureB
OA
RD
OF
APP
EALS
Proc
ess:
Appe
al a
n ac
tion
Sche
dule
hea
ring
with
in45
cal
enda
rday
s
BU
ILD
ING
INSP
ECTI
ON
CO
MM
ISSI
ON
(BIC
)
Plan
ning
Dep
artm
ent A
ppea
lsPr
oces
s:A
pplic
ant s
ubm
its a
ppea
lSt
aff e
nter
s in
foPl
anne
r brie
fs d
epar
tmen
tre
pres
enta
tive
on c
ase
issu
esH
earin
g he
ld to
revi
ew a
ppea
lIf
Dep
artm
ent u
phel
d he
arin
gre
sults
, sta
ffen
ters
info
into
orB
oard
ofA
ppea
ls d
atab
ase
IfPl
anni
ng o
vert
urne
d, s
taff
ente
rs in
fo o
r Boa
rdof
App
eals
dba
sePl
anne
r im
plem
ents
App
eal
deci
sion
and
mod
ifies
NSR
if
requ
ired
App
lican
t rec
ords
new
NSR
ifre
quire
dD
ecis
ion
App
rove
dD
enie
d
Dec
isio
nD
ecis
ion
Dec
isio
n
App
rove
dD
enie
dA
ppro
ved
Den
ied
App
rove
dD
enie
d
Plan
ner i
mpl
emen
tsA
ppea
l dec
isio
n
App
lican
t may
file
appe
al w
ith B
oard
of
App
eals
Proc
ess:
Perm
it re
-inst
ated
Beg
in w
ork
DEC
ISIO
N U
PHEL
DD
ECIS
ION
UPH
ELD
DEC
ISIO
N U
PHEL
D
December 2007 Page 85
B. INSPECTION SCHEDULING
Provide a centralized and automated inspection scheduling system for all disciplines:
• Integrated Voice Recognition System (IVR)
• Online / Website
• In-person
Star
tB
uild
ing,
Plu
mbi
ng,
Ele
ctric
al, a
nd S
treet
Spa
ce P
erm
its a
reIs
sued
New
Cus
tom
ers
or th
ose
that
may
be u
nfam
iliar
with
the
proc
ess.
Bui
ldin
g In
spec
tion
Div
isio
n7:
30 A
M –
5:00
PM
Insp
ecto
r Offi
ce H
ours
7:3
0 A
M –
8:30
AM
,3:
00 P
M –
4:00
PM
1660
Mis
sion
St.
3rd F
loor
Freq
uent
or E
xper
ienc
edC
usto
mer
s.
Rea
ches
Bui
ldin
g In
spec
tion
Div
isio
n
Ask
s cu
stom
er “W
hat t
ype
of in
spec
tion
are
you
look
ing
for?
” “D
o yo
u al
read
yha
ve a
per
mit
issu
ed?”
Bui
ldin
g In
spec
tion
– tra
nsfe
rred
8-6
096
if be
fore
3:0
0 P
ME
lect
rical
Insp
ectio
n –
with
Insp
ecto
r dur
ing
Offi
ce H
ours
Plu
mbi
ng In
spec
tion
– w
ith In
spec
tor d
urin
g O
ffice
Hou
rsH
ousi
ngIn
spec
tions
– tra
nsfe
rred
to 8
-622
0S
FFD
Insp
ectio
ns –
refe
rred
to S
FFD
558-
3300
DP
W -
BS
M –
refe
rred
to 5
54-5
810
DP
H –
refe
rred
to 2
52-3
800
Aug
ust 1
6, 2
007
BPR
– In
spec
tions
Sub
com
mitt
ee A
s-Is
Map
ping
– In
spec
tion
Sche
dulin
g
558-
6096
Sch
edul
ing
Win
dow
8:3
0 AM
–3:
00P
M o
nly
Cle
rical
Sta
ff ta
kes
in re
ques
tsC
usto
mer
is g
iven
an A
M/P
M in
spec
tion
win
dow
Cus
tom
ers
are
told
to c
onta
ct in
spec
tor f
or 1
hou
r win
dow
Insp
ectio
ns fe
es a
repa
id fo
r whe
n pe
rmit
is is
sued
Off-
hour
and
Life
Saf
ety
Insp
ectio
ns a
re p
repa
id a
t offi
ceC
usto
mer
can
sch
edul
e in
spec
tion
dire
ctly
with
insp
ecto
r for
ent
erta
inm
ent
perm
it,D
PH
per
mits
,pen
ding
com
plai
nt in
vest
igat
ion
Ele
ctric
al In
spec
tion
Div
isio
n7:
30 A
M –
5:00
PM
Insp
ecto
r Offi
ce H
ours
7:3
0 A
M –
8:30
AM
,3:
15 P
M –
4:00
PM
1660
Mis
sion
St.
3rd F
loor
Plu
mbi
ng In
spec
tion
Div
isio
n7:
30 A
M –
5:00
PM
Insp
ecto
r Offi
ce H
ours
7:3
0 A
M –
8:00
AM
,3:
00 P
M –
4:00
PM
1660
Mis
sion
St.
3rd F
loor
Rea
ches
Plu
mbi
ng In
spec
tion
Div
isio
n
558-
6054
Sch
edul
ing
Win
dow
7:3
0 AM
–8:
00A
M, 3
:00
PM –
4:00
PM
only
May
leav
e vo
icem
ail d
urin
g no
n-of
fice
hour
sD
istri
ctIn
spec
tor t
akes
in re
ques
tsC
usto
mer
is g
iven
a 2
hour
insp
ectio
n w
indo
wN
umbe
r of i
nspe
ctio
ns p
aid
with
per
mit
Pre
paid
ove
rtim
e sc
hedu
led
with
ass
igne
d in
spec
tor
558-
6030
Sch
edul
ing
Win
dow
8:3
0 AM
–5:
00P
MFa
x in
requ
ests
24/7
Voi
cem
ail 2
4/7
Voi
cem
ail d
urin
g no
n-of
fice
hour
sC
leric
al s
taff
take
s in
requ
ests
and
give
sth
em to
Dis
trict
Insp
ecto
rsIn
spec
tion
is g
iven
1-1
.5 h
our w
indo
wN
umbe
r of i
nspe
ctio
ns p
aid
with
per
mit
Off
hour
requ
est a
ccep
ted
onlin
e, p
re-a
rrang
ed, p
repa
id
Rea
ches
Ele
ctric
al In
spec
tion
Div
isio
n
SFF
D7:
00 A
M –
5:00
PM
698
2nd S
treet
Rea
ches
SFF
DM
ain
Line
: 558
-330
0,ca
ll in
spec
tord
irect
ly, v
oice
mai
lFa
x (5
58-3
323)
requ
est/p
ay b
yph
one
Appl
ican
t giv
es p
rope
rtyad
dres
s an
d in
spec
tor t
o su
ppor
t sta
ff,ca
ll is
tran
sfer
red
to d
istri
ct in
spec
tor’s
dire
ct li
ne.
Sche
dulin
g In
spec
tions
Win
dow
with
Dis
trict
Insp
ecto
r 7:0
0 AM
–8:
30 A
M, 3
:30
PM
–5:
00 P
MTu
rnar
ound
tim
e w
ithin
3 b
usin
ess
days
Insp
ectio
nho
urs
are
avai
labl
ebe
twee
n8:
30 A
M –
4:00
PM
Spec
ific
time
for i
nspe
ctio
n is
giv
en, n
o w
indo
wM
ay re
sche
dule
fiel
d in
spec
tions
on fi
eld
depe
ndin
g on
job
Ove
rtim
e In
spec
tions
are
by
cont
ract
– re
fere
nce
by p
erm
itap
plic
atio
n nu
mbe
r,ap
plic
ant m
ust g
o to
2nd
Stre
et o
ffice
, fee
s ar
e pa
id a
ccor
ding
to fe
e sc
hedu
les
(but
will
alw
ays
bear
rang
ed to
acc
omm
odat
e), c
an m
ake
appo
intm
ents
on s
ite b
yap
poin
tmen
t boo
kM
ake
paym
ent v
ia w
ebsi
te (s
oon
to b
e ad
ded)
DP
W -
BS
M7:
00 A
M –
5:00
PM
875
Ste
vens
on S
treet
, Rm
.460
Rea
ches
DP
W -
BS
M
Gen
eral
Info
554
-581
0, fa
x55
4-58
43 -
7:00
AM
–
5:00
PM
, voi
cem
ail 5
54-7
149
Afte
r offi
ce h
ours
, cal
l 311
7:00
AM
–9:
00 A
M, 3
:00
PM
–5:
00 P
M to
spea
k w
ith a
n in
spec
tor,
mak
e ar
rang
emen
ts to
sche
dule
an
appo
intm
ent
Giv
e pr
oper
tyad
dres
s an
d pe
rmit
num
ber,
cler
ical
sta
ff w
ill ta
ke it
and
give
it to
an
insp
ecto
rTu
rnar
ound
tim
e is
10
busi
ness
days
for s
treet
spac
e, n
ew c
onst
ruct
ion
Insp
ectio
n w
indo
w is
15
–30
min
utes
Ove
rtim
e In
spec
tions
: Pre
paid
3 b
usin
ess
days
prio
r, 1
busi
ness
day
can
cella
tion
win
dow
Spec
ial I
nspe
ctio
ns(C
ontr
acto
rs re
ques
t U
nder
writ
er's
Labo
rato
ries
list o
f ag
enci
es)
Coordinates Special Inspections withCertified Engineer or Testing Agency
DP
HH
ours
of I
nspe
ctio
n: 1
0:00
AM
–4:
00 P
M13
90 M
arke
tStre
et, S
uite
210
Cal
l 2 d
ays
for e
very
thin
g bu
t fin
al (3
day
s)R
each
es D
PH
252-
3800
and
SF
311
Cus
tom
erS
ervi
ceC
ente
r24
-hou
r voi
cem
ail.
No
dire
ctor
y on
mai
n lin
eN
o ov
ertim
e in
spec
tions
Insp
ecto
rs s
ched
ule
thei
r ow
n in
spec
tions
Turn
arou
nd ti
me
is 1
–2
busi
ness
day
sIn
spec
tions
are
usu
ally
com
plai
nts,
or b
i-yea
rly in
spec
tions
for f
ood
esta
blis
hmen
tsW
hen
com
plai
nts
com
e in
,the
y ar
e in
putte
d in
the
com
pute
r at f
ront
des
k an
d ro
uted
to th
e D
istri
ct In
spec
tor
For i
nqui
ries
abou
t an
esta
blis
hmen
t, ch
eck
web
site
, ent
erad
dres
sto
see
Dis
trict
Insp
ecto
r’s n
ame
and
num
ber
Eve
ryth
ing
is d
one
by p
hone
. No
auto
mat
ion.
Mos
tw
orkl
oad
is e
ither
food
est
ablis
hmen
ts, c
ompl
aint
-driv
enan
d if
viol
atio
n fo
und
durin
g in
spec
tion,
pro
vide
trai
ning
tost
aff a
nd o
wne
rs
Dep
artm
ent o
fB
uild
ing
Insp
ectio
nC
entra
l Per
mit
Bur
eau
Plu
mbi
ng a
ndE
lect
rical
Win
dow
Cus
tom
er c
alls
DB
I Mai
n Li
ne fo
rIns
pect
ion
558-
6088
, 7:3
0 A
M –
5:00
PM
Voic
emai
l afte
rhou
rs/h
olid
ays
Fiel
dIn
spec
tions
Fini
sh
Needs additional plumbing/electricalinspections.Return to DBI to pay foradditionalinspections
Food
faci
litie
sLa
undr
omat
s (S
FFD
, Pla
nnin
g D
epar
tmen
t)C
anna
bis
club
(SFF
D, P
lann
ing
Dep
artm
ent)
Pub
lic s
wim
min
gpo
ols
and
spas
Cel
lula
r ant
enna
sH
azar
dous
was
te/m
ater
ial s
tora
geC
linic
sK
enne
ls/p
et s
hops
Pet
hos
pita
ls fo
r ani
mal
s he
ldov
er 1
bus
ines
s da
y(S
FFD
, Pla
nnin
g D
epar
tmen
t als
o)Lo
cal n
oise
ordi
nanc
eC
onst
ruct
ion
site
s –
envi
ronm
enta
l hea
lth?
Wel
lsP
re-fi
nal i
nspe
ctio
ns to
mak
e re
com
men
datio
ns fo
rco
llect
ions
Fina
l ins
pect
ions
cha
nges
Con
dom
iniu
m C
onve
rsio
n: D
PW -
BS
MA
pplic
atio
n fo
r Phy
sica
lIns
pect
ion
Ass
igne
d 3R
num
ber (
DB
I)P
hysi
cal I
nspe
ctio
n pe
rform
ed (2
-wk
Not
ice)
Ord
er fi
les
from
mic
rofil
m,c
oord
inat
ew
ith E
ID/P
IDP
erm
it re
quire
d fo
r Cer
tific
ate
of F
inal
Com
plet
ion
(con
dos)
Afte
r Cer
tific
ate
of F
inal
Com
plet
ion,
goes
to S
F C
ity A
ttorn
ey's
Offi
ceR
etur
n to
DP
W -
BS
Mfo
r map
ping
Dec
embe
r 200
7
BPR
– In
spec
tions
Sub
com
mitt
ee T
o-B
e M
appi
ng:
Insp
ectio
n Sc
hedu
ling
Cen
tral
ized
sche
dulin
g sy
stem
will
elec
tron
ical
lyro
ute
insp
ectio
n sc
hedu
les
to e
ach
disc
iplin
e/ag
ency
.
DB
I BID
DB
I EID
DPW
-B
SM
MO
D
SFFD
DPH
SPEC
IAL
INSP
ECTI
ON
S
DB
I PID
FEA
TUR
ES O
F C
ENTR
ALI
ZED
/AU
TOM
ATE
D IN
SPEC
TIO
N S
CH
EDU
LIN
G:
Prov
ide
an o
ptio
nto
talk
to in
spec
tor/l
ive
pers
on, o
ffer t
rans
latio
nsu
ch a
s C
hine
sean
d Sp
anis
h.H
ybrid
sys
tem
that
ispa
rtly
aut
omat
edfo
rins
pect
ion
time
slot
s, w
ith s
uper
viso
rsal
loca
ting
day-
of, t
o pr
ovid
ene
eded
flexi
bilit
y (in
spec
tor c
alls
toco
nfirm
).In
clud
ege
nera
ted
type
of in
spec
tions
that
are
kno
wn
to ta
ketim
e,so
that
aut
omat
ed s
yste
m c
an te
llho
w m
any
of w
hatt
ypes
you
need
to p
rovi
de o
n an
y gi
ven
day.
Coo
rdin
ated
insp
ectio
ns –
Allo
wsl
ots/
hour
sfo
r coo
rdin
ated
insp
ectio
ns.
Pre-
Fina
l – c
ontr
acto
r mak
esca
ll on
nee
d fo
r pre
-fina
l, on
ce a
ll tr
ades
sign
ed-o
ff. B
uild
ing
sign
s of
f fin
al in
spec
tion.
Exte
nsio
ns/re
visi
ons
are
appr
oved
with
spe
cific
timef
ram
es to
war
ds c
ompl
etio
n as
pro
gres
sm
ade
with
intim
efra
me.
Fina
l Ins
pect
ions
– fo
llow
thro
ugh
by D
BI f
or N
OV.
Com
pute
r to
final
ize
all e
xpire
d pe
rmits
and
abat
e an
y co
mpl
aint
s &
not
ice
of v
iola
tion/
s.
Als
oin
clud
es In
spec
tion
Sche
dulin
gfo
rPR
E-C
ON
STR
UC
TIO
N M
EETI
NG
with
:B
uild
ing
Insp
ectio
n D
ivis
ion
Dep
artm
ento
f Pub
lic W
orks
SFFD
–If
requ
este
d.Sp
ecia
l Ins
pect
ions
,Ele
ctric
alIn
spec
tion
Div
isio
nPl
umbi
ng In
spec
tion
Div
isio
nPG
&E
– Se
rvic
e en
tran
ce c
ondu
it
Syst
em/S
uper
viso
rSo
rt In
spec
tion
48ho
urs
with
Goa
l of
24 h
ours
Insp
ecto
r‘C
old
call’
with
win
dow
fori
nspe
ctio
n
FIN
AL
INSP
ECTI
ON
Inte
grat
edVo
ice
Rec
ogni
tion
(IVR
)
ON
E M
AIN
LIN
EB
iling
ual S
ervi
ces
STA
RT
Perm
itIs
sued
Freq
uent
and
New
Cus
tom
ers
Dire
ct c
allt
o In
spec
tor/A
genc
y
Centralized/Automated Inspection Scheduling
Onl
ine/
Web
site
Fiel
d In
spec
tion
Additional inspection/sneeded
December 2007 Page 88
C. NEW CONSTRUCTION (COMMERCIAL/RESIDENTIAL)
The following maps identify the necessary inspections from pre-construction meetings to building final, certificate of final completion, and annual inspections.
STA
RT
Bui
ldin
gPe
rmit
is Is
sued
Aug
ust 0
7, 2
007
BPR
– In
spec
tions
Sub
com
mitt
ee A
s-Is
Map
ping
: New
Con
stru
ctio
n (C
omm
erci
al/R
esid
entia
l)
Cus
tom
ers
notif
ied
by:
1) B
ack
of p
ink
appl
icat
ions
2) J
ob c
ard;
form
½ (w
hite
)
(1)*
STA
RT
WO
RK
INSP
ECTI
ON
Sta
rt w
ork
insp
ectio
n (v
erify
sco
pe o
f wor
k)
Cal
l to
sche
dule
–8:
30 A
M c
leric
alsc
hedu
lers
bet
wee
n 7:
30 –
8:30
AM
& 3
:30
–4:
30 P
M; a
t PID
and
EID
, clie
nts
able
to
spea
k to
live
insp
ecto
rFa
x D
PW
Cal
l tel
epho
ne n
umbe
r on
job
card
or d
irect
lyto
insp
ecto
r, m
essa
ge m
achi
ne, 7
2 ho
ur o
rle
sstu
rnar
ound
tim
e –
SFF
D
BEF
OR
E:D
PW
1. F
ax p
erm
it co
py: (
415)
654
-616
1 2
. Cal
l for
pre
cons
truct
ion/
site
mee
ting:
(415
) 554
-714
9 3
. Loo
k at
cond
ition
s, s
ervi
ce, u
tility
shu
t-off,
etc
. 4
. Set
up
park
ing,
ove
rhea
d, in
clud
ing
MU
NI
5. P
G&E
dis
cret
iona
ry–
diffi
cult,
can
take
up
to 3
wee
ks 6
. Wat
er D
epar
tmen
t – d
iscr
etio
nary
SPE
CIA
L IN
SP
EC
TIO
NS
1 U
rban
For
estry
– tr
ee re
mov
al 2
. Enc
roac
hmen
t per
mit
(DP
W)
3. U
nder
grou
nd S
ervi
ce A
lert
(US
A)
(2)*
SITE
INSP
ECTI
ON
(Pre
-co
nstr
uctio
n)...
Con
tinue
d
...C
ontin
ued
(3)*
EXC
AVA
TIO
N/
UN
DER
PIN
NIN
G/
SHO
RIN
G
(6)*
CO
VER
INSP
ECTI
ON
S
(5)*
FRA
MIN
G/
SUPE
RST
RU
CTU
RE
(8)*
FIN
AL/
Cer
tific
ate
ofFi
nal C
ompl
etio
n
(7)*
PRE-
FIN
AL
INSP
ECTI
ON
S
(4)*
FOU
ND
ATI
ON
S/ST
EEL/
RET
AIN
ING
WA
LL
Bui
ldin
g In
spec
tion
Div
isio
n
Spe
cial
Insp
ectio
ns
DP
H
Wat
er
Cal
-OS
HA
Rev
iew
pla
ns
Cra
ne/C
al-O
SH
A-C
oord
inat
ed b
y ag
ent/c
ontra
ctor
-DB
I rep
resa
ntat
ives
-Con
tract
or-D
esig
n pr
ofes
sion
al/s
Plu
mbi
ng/E
lect
rical
und
ergr
ound
PG
&E
und
ergr
ound
Spe
cial
Insp
ectio
ns/E
ngin
eer
Bui
ldin
g In
spec
tion
Div
isio
n
SFF
D s
ervi
ce (P
lum
bing
)
SFF
D a
nd P
ID
Plu
mbi
ng/M
echa
nica
l
Ele
ctric
al
SFF
D
Bui
ldin
g In
spec
tion
Div
isio
n
Spe
cial
Insp
ectio
ns
DAS
/May
or's
Offi
ce o
n D
isab
ility
OS
HA
– c
ompl
aint
s
Insu
latio
n/T2
4 af
ter f
ram
eso
und-
proo
fing
Bui
ldin
g In
spec
tion
Div
isio
n –
OK
toco
ver,
shee
trock
/stu
cco
SFF
D
Sho
wer
Pan
s (P
ID)
Spe
cial
Insp
ectio
ns
Pre
-Tem
pora
ry C
ertif
icat
e of
Occ
upan
cy te
st
Life
saf
ety
– w
ho g
ets
invo
lved
? B
ID, S
FFD
, EID
-af
ter h
ours
(coo
rdin
atio
n is
an
issu
e)P
lum
bing
Insp
ectio
n D
ivis
ion
Ele
ctric
al In
spec
tion
Div
isio
n
DP
WB
urea
u of
Urb
an F
ores
try
Tran
sit I
mpa
ct D
evel
opm
ent F
ee
Spe
cial
Insp
ectio
ns
DP
W-B
SM (s
treet
s, s
idew
alks
, cur
bs, d
rivew
ay)
Incl
usio
nary
hou
sing
LEE
D/G
reen
May
or's
Offi
ce o
n D
isab
ility
(pub
licly
-fund
ed b
uild
ings
)
DP
H
OS
HA
/Cal
-OSH
A
Ele
vato
r/esc
alat
or
Tem
pora
ry C
ertif
icat
eof
Occ
upan
cy is
sued
Fina
l fro
m E
lect
rical
Insp
ectio
nD
ivis
ion/
Plu
mbi
ng In
spec
tion
Div
isio
nC
ertif
icat
ions
Con
dom
iniu
m m
ap
Ext
erio
r Bui
ldin
gIn
spec
tion
Div
isio
n m
aint
enan
ceC
al-O
SH
A
Add
ress
ope
n pe
rmits
on
Bui
ldin
g In
spec
tion
Div
isio
nIn
clus
iona
ry h
ousi
ng
(9)*
CLO
SE O
UT
PER
MIT
S
DPH
, SFF
D, B
IDEI
DPI
D
Sig
n-of
f job
car
d/is
sue
Cer
tific
ate
of F
inal
Com
plet
ion
in fi
eld
whe
nal
l oth
er fi
nal s
ign
offs
are
done
Sig
n-of
f ins
pect
or c
ard
Qua
lity
cont
rol (
Sen
ior)
Cle
rical
inpu
t in
com
pute
r
Insp
ecto
r’s jo
bca
rd/
Cer
tific
ate
of F
inal
Com
plet
ion
and
Occ
upan
cy to
mic
rofil
m
Com
men
ts re
view
edby
sen
ior i
nspe
ctor
Inpu
t in
com
pute
r
No
mic
rofil
m
Com
men
ts re
view
edby
sen
ior i
nspe
ctor
Pap
er p
erm
its s
ent t
om
icro
film
-3
yrs
late
r(P
lum
bing
Insp
ectio
nD
ivis
ion
file
cabi
net)
Wor
king
on
elec
troni
cve
rsio
n lik
e El
ectri
cal
Insp
ectio
n D
ivis
ion.
AN
NU
AL
INSP
ECTI
ON
S
Fuel
sto
rage
Und
erw
riter
’s L
abor
ator
ies
cert
ifica
teB
oile
r
Hou
sing
Ann
ual I
nspe
ctio
ns
Vario
us S
FFD
Insp
ectio
ns
Hig
h R
ise
*All
insp
ectio
ns a
rein
depe
nden
tly s
ched
uled
with
spec
ific
agen
cy.
Ford
etai
ls,
see
Sch
edul
ing
Insp
ectio
n“A
s-Is
” Map
ping
.
STA
RT
Perm
itIs
sued
Dec
embe
r 200
7
BPR
– In
spec
tions
Sub
com
mitt
ee T
o-B
e M
appi
ng: N
ew C
onst
ruct
ion
(Com
mer
cial
/Res
iden
tial)
Cus
tom
ers
notif
ied
(1)*
STA
RT
WO
RK
INSP
ECTI
ON
Star
t wor
k in
spec
tion
(ver
ify s
cope
ofw
ork)
Sche
dule
–24
/7
Cal
l # o
n jo
b ca
rd o
r dire
ctly
toin
spec
tor,
mes
sage
mac
hine
, 72
hour
or
less
turn
arou
nd ti
me
– SF
FD
BEF
OR
E:P
re-c
onst
ruct
ion
mee
ting
with
all
agen
cies
con
cern
ed, s
ched
uled
thru
DB
I Cen
traliz
edSy
stem
.P
G&E
– T
ask
Forc
e F
ollo
w P
erfo
rman
ce S
tand
ards
Spe
cial
Insp
ectio
ns –
Tas
kFo
rce
(2)*
SITE
INSP
ECTI
ON
(Pre
-co
nstr
uctio
n)...
Con
tinue
d
...C
ontin
ued
(3)*
EXC
AVA
TIO
N/
UN
DER
PIN
NIN
G/
SHO
RIN
G
(6)*
CO
VER
INSP
ECTI
ON
S
(5)*
FRA
MIN
G/
SUPE
RST
RU
CTU
RE
(8)*
FIN
AL/
Cer
tific
ate
ofFi
nal C
ompl
etio
n
(7)*
PRE-
FIN
AL
INSP
ECTI
ON
S
(4)*
FOU
ND
ATI
ON
S/ST
EEL/
RET
AIN
ING
WA
LL
Bui
ldin
g In
spec
tion
Div
isio
n
Spec
ial I
nspe
ctio
ns
DPH
Wat
er
Cal
-OSH
A
Rev
iew
pla
ns
Cra
ne/C
al-O
SHA
-Coo
rdin
ated
by
agen
t/con
trac
tor
-DB
I rep
s-C
ontr
acto
r-D
esig
n pr
ofes
sion
al/s
DB
I
DPW
-B
SM
Plum
bing
/Ele
ctric
al u
nder
grou
nd
PG&
E un
derg
roun
d
Spec
ial I
nspe
ctio
ns/E
ngin
eer
Bui
ldin
g In
spec
tion
Div
isio
n
Fire
ser
vice
s (S
FFD
and
PID
)
Plum
bing
/Mec
hani
cal (
roug
h sp
rinkl
er)
Elec
tric
al In
spec
tion
Div
isio
n
SFFD
Bui
ldin
g In
spec
tion
Div
isio
n
Spec
ial I
nspe
ctio
ns
DB
I Dis
able
d A
cces
s Se
ctio
n/M
ayor
’sO
ffice
on
Dis
abili
tyC
al-O
SHA
– c
ompl
aint
s
Insu
latio
n/Ti
tle 2
4 af
ter f
ram
e so
und-
proo
fing
Bui
ldin
g In
spec
tion
Div
isio
n –
OK
to c
over
,sh
eetr
ock/
stuc
coSF
FD
Show
er P
ans
(PID
)
Spec
ial I
nspe
ctio
ns
Pre-
Tem
pora
ry C
ertif
icat
eof
Occ
upan
cy te
st
Life
saf
ety
– w
ho g
ets
invo
lved
? B
uild
ing
Insp
ectio
nD
ivis
ion,
SFF
D, E
lect
rical
-af
terh
ours
Plum
bing
Insp
ectio
n D
ivis
ion
Elec
tric
al In
spec
tion
Div
isio
n
DPW
Bur
eau
of U
rban
For
estr
y
Tran
sit I
mpa
ct D
evel
opm
ent F
ee
Spec
ial I
nspe
ctio
ns
DPW
-B
SM (s
tree
ts, s
idew
alks
, cur
bs, d
rivew
ay)
Incl
usio
nary
hou
sing
LEED
/Gre
en
May
or’s
Offi
ce o
n D
isab
ility
(pub
licly
-fund
ed b
uild
ing)
DPH
OSH
A/C
al-O
SHA
Elev
ator
/esc
alat
or
Tem
pora
ry C
ertif
icat
eof
Occ
upan
cy is
sued
Fina
l fro
mEl
ectr
ical
/Pl
umbi
ng In
spec
tion
Div
isio
nC
ertif
icat
ions
Con
do m
ap
Exte
rior b
uild
ing
mai
nten
ance
Cal
-OSH
A
Add
ress
ope
n pe
rmits
on B
uild
ing
Incl
usio
nary
hou
sing
(9)*
CLO
SE O
UT
PER
MIT
S(2
Fin
al S
ets)
DPH
, SFF
D, B
IDEI
DPI
D
Sign
off
job
card
/issu
eC
ertif
icat
e of
Fin
alC
ompl
etio
n in
fiel
d w
hen
all o
ther
fina
l sig
n of
fsar
edo
neSi
gn o
ff in
spec
tor c
ard
Qua
lity
cont
rol (
seni
or)
Cle
rical
inpu
t in
com
pute
r
Insp
ecto
r’s jo
b ca
rd/
Cer
tific
ate
of F
inal
Com
plet
ion
to m
icro
film
Com
men
tsre
view
ed b
yse
nior
insp
ecto
rIn
put i
n co
mpu
ter
No
mic
rofil
m
Com
men
ts re
view
ed b
yse
nior
insp
ecto
rPa
per p
erm
its s
ent t
om
icro
film
– A
utom
atio
n,in
clud
ing
scan
ning
of
pape
r per
mits
and
elec
tron
ic a
rchi
ving
.
AN
NU
AL
INSP
ECTI
ON
S*
Fuel
sto
rage
Und
erw
riter
’sLa
bora
torie
s ce
rtifi
cate
Boi
ler
Hou
sing
Ann
ual
Insp
ectio
nsVa
rious
SFF
DIn
spec
tions
Hig
h ris
e
*All
insp
ectio
n sc
hedu
ling
will
go
thro
ugh
DB
I C
entr
aliz
ed/A
utom
ated
Sch
edul
ing
Syst
em
December 2007 Page 91
D. REVISIONS: NEW STRUCTURAL, ENVELOPE CHANGES, ARCHITECTURAL
The following maps demonstrate the process when changes are made during construction to the approved plans and permits.
BU
ILD
ING
PER
MIT
is A
ppro
ved
and
Issu
ed
Aug
ust 1
6, 2
007
BPR
– In
spec
tions
Sub
com
mitt
ee A
s-Is
Map
ping
– R
evis
ions
: New
Str
uctu
ral,
Enve
lope
Cha
nges
, Arc
hite
ctur
al
Not
e: A
ll in
spec
tions
are
inde
pend
ently
sch
edul
ed w
ithsp
ecifi
c ag
ency
. Fo
r det
ails
,se
e Sc
hedu
ling
Insp
ectio
n“A
s-Is
” M
appi
ng.
Eng
inee
r/Arc
hite
ctre
quire
d ch
ange
s
Clie
nt P
icks
-Up
Perm
it
Wor
k un
derw
ay
….o
ops,
cha
nges
iden
tifie
d in
fiel
d
See
“AS-
IS”
PLA
N R
EVIE
WM
AP
Issu
es: R
evis
ions
/Cha
nges
mea
ns-
New
job
card
/s;
Job
num
ber/s
;or,
Mul
tiple
job
card
s an
d jo
b nu
mbe
rs.
How
are
thes
etr
acke
d?C
ontin
ue w
ork
with
out p
erm
it/be
yond
scop
e
Sub
mitt
al to
DB
I for
new
orm
ultip
lech
ange
s.
...C
ontin
ue
Con
tinue
...
$
$ $
Pay
fees
Pic
kup
Per
mit/
s fo
r Rev
isio
n/s
and
othe
r job
car
d/s
Expi
ratio
n tim
elin
e,fie
ldto
val
uatio
n =
90 c
alen
dard
ays
ENVE
LOPE
CH
AN
GES
:6'
Hei
ght v
aria
ble
ZON
ING
AD
MIN
ISTR
ATO
R10
%75
+ H
igh
Ris
e
311
-Pl
anni
ngD
epar
tmen
tA
ppea
ls
AR
CH
ITEC
TUR
AL:
(Sam
e pr
oces
s as
fore
goin
g)
Sche
dule
Insp
ectio
n/s
STA
RT
Perm
itIs
sued
Dec
embe
r 200
7
BPR
Insp
ectio
ns S
ubco
mm
ittee
To-
Be
Map
ping
: R
evis
ions
-N
ew S
truc
tura
l, En
velo
pe C
hang
es, A
rchi
tect
ural
Engi
neer
/Arc
hite
ctre
quire
d ch
ange
s
Cus
tom
erPi
cks-
Up
Perm
it
Wor
k un
derw
ay
….o
ops,
cha
nges
iden
tifie
d in
fiel
d
Subm
it re
visi
ons/
chan
ges
if:Fi
eld
Insp
ecto
r did
not
acce
ptch
ange
s/re
visi
ons;
or,
If D
istri
ctIn
spec
tor b
elie
ves
chan
ge is
sub
stan
tial.
Subm
ittal
toD
BI f
orne
wor
mul
tiple
chan
ges.
...C
ontin
ue
Con
tinue
...
Expi
ratio
n tim
elin
e,fie
ldto
val
uatio
n =
90 c
alen
dard
ays
ENVE
LOPE
CH
AN
GES
:6'
Hei
ght v
aria
ble
ZON
ING
AD
MIN
ISTR
ATO
R
311
–Pl
anni
ngD
epar
tmen
tA
ppea
ls
AR
CH
ITEC
TUR
AL:
(Sam
e pr
oces
s as
fore
goin
g)
Fiel
d In
spec
tora
ccep
tsch
ange
s (n
on-P
lann
ing
code
issu
esi.e
. bui
ldin
gen
velo
pe, w
ork
unde
rco
ntin
uous
app
rova
l)
If D
istr
ict I
nspe
ctor
belie
ves
chan
ge is
sub
stan
tial(
i.e.
chan
ge in
bui
ldin
gen
velo
pe),
STO
PJO
B, g
o to
DB
I for
revi
sion
sub
mitt
al.
$
$ $
Pay
fees
Pick
up
perm
its a
nd jo
bca
rds
for r
evis
ions
FIEL
DIN
SPEC
TIO
N
FIEL
DIN
SPEC
TIO
N
Sche
dule
Insp
ectio
n
Cen
tral
ized
/A
utom
ated
DB
I Sys
tem
Sche
dule
Insp
ectio
n
Cen
tral
ized
/A
utom
ated
DB
ISy
stem
December 2007 Page 94
E. OVERLAPPING INSPECTIONS
This map illustrates the different disciplines that are required to conduct inspection and eliminates unnecessary overlapping inspections.
PER
MIT
Issu
ed
Aug
ust 7
, 200
7
BPR
– In
spec
tions
Sub
com
mitt
ee A
s-Is
Map
ping
: O
verla
ppin
g In
spec
tions
CO
NC
RET
E/ST
EEL
Con
cret
e-en
case
d E
lect
rode
/E
lect
rical
con
duit
Spe
cial
Insp
ectio
n
Stru
ctur
al E
ngin
eer
Bui
ldin
g In
spec
tion
Div
isio
n
Plu
mbi
ng In
spec
tion
Div
isio
n(d
rain
s/w
ater
)S
FFD
SUPE
RST
RU
CTU
RE
BU
ILD
ING
FIN
AL
SPEC
IAL
INSP
ECTI
ON
S
Tena
nt C
omm
on Im
prov
emen
t(TC
I)
Spe
cial
Insp
ectio
ns
Ele
ctric
al In
spec
tion
Div
isio
n, P
ID In
spec
tion
Div
isio
n
DP
H
DP
W (B
urea
u of
Stre
et U
se &
Map
ping
/Bur
eau
ofU
rban
For
estry
)M
ayor
’s O
ffice
on
Dis
abili
ty
SFF
D
Sta
te (E
leva
tor)
Mec
hani
cal
Bui
ldin
g In
spec
tion
Div
isio
n
Plu
mbi
ng In
spec
tion
Div
isio
n
SFF
D
Ele
ctric
al In
spec
tion
Div
isio
n
Spe
cial
Insp
ectio
n
Ans
ul s
yste
m
Furn
ace
Duc
ts(B
uild
ing,
Ele
ctric
al a
nd P
lum
bing
Insp
ectio
nD
ivis
ions
)S
FFD
Sto
ppin
g (B
uild
ing,
Ele
ctric
al, a
nd P
lum
bing
Insp
ectio
n D
ivis
ions
)D
emol
ition
Ele
vato
rs
Res
taur
ants
Pum
ps
Life
Saf
ety
Eng
inee
r of r
ecor
d –
coor
dina
tes/
assi
gns
Spe
cial
Insp
ectio
n*P
lan
Rev
iew
Eng
inee
r: Is
sues
-DB
I doe
s no
t kno
w w
ho-p
roof
of a
ppro
ved
fabr
icat
ors?
-Los
t ins
pect
ors
repo
rts a
nd li
st o
f cer
tifie
d-d
iffic
ult t
o ke
ep tr
ack
-no
mec
hani
sm fo
rrep
ortin
g c
onst
ruct
ion
defe
ctO
utsi
de a
genc
ies
*All
insp
ectio
ns a
re
inde
pend
ently
sch
edul
edw
ithsp
ecifi
c ag
ency
. Fo
r det
ails
,se
e Sc
hedu
ling
Insp
ectio
n“A
s-Is
” M
appi
ng.
CC
E/U
FER
/E
lect
rical
Con
duit St
ruct
ural
Eng
inee
r
Oth
ers.
..
PID
(dra
ins/
wat
er)
BID
SFF
D
Fire
Sto
ppin
g(B
ID, P
ID, E
ID)
Ans
ul S
yste
mB
ID
Stru
ctur
alE
ngin
eer
Duc
ts (B
ID,
PID
, BID
)D
emol
ition
PID
SFF
D(s
prin
kler
s)
Furn
ace
EID
Pum
ps
Dem
oliti
onD
ucts
(BID
,P
ID, B
ID)
Spec
ial
Insp
ectio
nTC
I
DP
W –
BSM
DP
W -
BU
F
EID
, PID
SFF
DM
echa
nica
l
MO
D
Sta
te(E
leva
tor)
Eng
inee
r of
reco
rdco
ordi
nate
s/as
sign
s Sp
ecia
lIn
spec
tion
Pla
n R
evie
wE
ngin
eer*
Out
side
Age
ncie
s
PER
MIT
Issu
ed
Con
cret
e-E
ncas
ed E
lect
rode
/E
lect
rical
con
duit
Spe
cial
Insp
ectio
n
Stru
ctur
al E
ngin
eer
Bui
ldin
g In
spec
tion
Div
isio
n
Plu
mbi
ng In
spec
tion
Div
isio
n(d
rain
s/w
ater
)S
FFD
SPEC
IAL
INSP
ECTI
ON
S
Tena
nt C
omm
on Im
prov
emen
t (TC
I)
Spe
cial
Insp
ectio
ns
Bui
ldin
g In
spec
tion,
Ele
ctric
al In
spec
tion
and
Plu
mbi
ng In
spec
tion
Div
isio
nsD
PH
DP
W -
BS
M, B
urea
u of
Urb
an F
ores
try)
MO
D
SFF
D
Sta
te (E
leva
tor)
Mec
hani
cal
Bui
ldin
g In
spec
tion
Div
isio
n
Plu
mbi
ng In
spec
tion
Div
isio
n
SFF
D
Ele
ctric
al In
spec
tion
Div
isio
n
Spe
cial
Insp
ectio
n
Ans
ul s
yste
m
Furn
ace
Duc
ts (P
lum
bing
Insp
ectio
n D
ivis
ion)
TASK
FO
RC
EW
OR
KIN
GO
N N
EW P
RO
CED
UR
ESFO
R S
PEC
IAL
INSP
ECTI
ON
S
All
insp
ectio
n sc
hedu
les
will
go
thro
ugh
DB
I C
entr
aliz
ed/ A
utom
ated
Sc
hedu
ling
Syst
em
Con
cret
e-E
ncas
edE
lect
rode
/E
lect
rical
Con
duit
Stru
ctur
al E
ngin
eer
Spe
cial
Insp
ectio
ns
PID
(dra
ins/
wat
er)
BID
SFF
D
SFF
D S
topp
ing
(BID
)
Ans
ul S
yste
mB
ID
Pum
ps
Duc
ts (P
ID)
PID
SFF
D(s
prin
kler
s)
Furn
ace
Elev
ator
s
DP
H
Dem
oliti
on
Spec
ial
Insp
ectio
nTC
I
DP
W (B
SM
/BU
F)
BID
, EID
,P
ID
SFF
DM
echa
nica
l
MO
D
Sta
te(E
leva
tor)
DB
I Cen
tral
ized
/Aut
omat
edIn
spec
tion
Sche
dulin
gSy
stem
(*se
eIn
spec
tion
Sche
dulin
g To
-Be
Map
)
CO
NC
RET
E/ST
EEL
SFFD
Sto
ppin
g(B
ID In
spec
tion
Div
isio
n)D
emol
ition
Elev
ator
s
Res
taur
ants
Pum
ps
Life
Saf
ety
SUPE
RST
RU
CTU
RE
Dem
oliti
onE
ID
Spe
cial
Insp
ectio
n
Res
taur
ants
DB
I Cen
tral
ized
/Aut
omat
edIn
spec
tion
Sche
dulin
g Sy
stem
(*se
e In
spec
tion
Sche
dulin
gTo
-Be
Map
)
BID
FIN
AL
DB
I Cen
tral
ized
/Aut
omat
edIn
spec
tion
Sche
dulin
g Sy
stem
(*se
e In
spec
tion
Sche
dulin
gTo
-Be
Map
)
Dec
embe
r 200
7
BPR
– In
spec
tions
Sub
com
mitt
ee T
o-B
e M
appi
ng:
Ove
rlapp
ing
Insp
ectio
ns
December 2007 Page 97
F. SUPERSTRUCTURES
This map illustrates the different disciplines that are required to conduct inspections of the superstructure including structural, architectural, electrical, plumbing, fire life safety, and elevator inspections.
Dec
embe
r 200
7
BPR
– In
spec
tion
Subc
omm
ittee
To-
Be
Map
ping
: Su
pers
truc
ture
s
Inte
grat
ed V
oice
Rec
ogni
tion
(IVR
)
One
Mai
n Li
neB
iling
ual S
ervi
ces
STA
RT
Perm
itIs
sued
BID
SPEC
IAL
INSP
ECTI
ON
PID
PGan
dE
EID
Freq
uent
and
New
Cus
tom
er
SFFD
Wel
ding
for m
omen
tfra
me
Shea
r wal
lTi
e do
wns
Stee
l/con
nect
or p
lace
men
tD
iaph
ragm
Anc
hor b
olts
Epox
y do
wel
sM
ason
ry
Shea
r wal
lsD
iaph
ragm
nai
ling
Bui
ldin
g he
ight
, len
gth,
wid
thSt
ruct
ural
and
Arc
hite
ctur
al c
ompl
ianc
eR
ough
mec
hani
cal –
env
ironm
enta
lair
and
vent
sSp
ot-c
heck
spe
cial
insp
ecto
rPa
rape
t and
Fire
ass
embl
ies
Fire
cau
lkin
gLa
tch
Wea
ther
-pro
ofin
g, fl
ashi
ng, p
aper
Title
24
Shee
troc
k –
fire
asse
mbl
yO
ccup
ancy
sep
arat
ion
Elec
tric
al d
istr
ibut
ion
syst
emR
ough
wiri
ng, m
ultip
le w
ire in
spec
tions
Life
saf
ety
HVA
C –
pow
er a
nd c
ontr
olEm
erge
ncy
pow
erEn
ergy
– T
itle
24Fi
re s
topp
ing
for e
lect
rical
dist
ribut
ion
Elec
tric
al (w
ith S
tate
insp
ectio
n)Fe
eder
to m
achi
nery
onl
y
Rou
gh p
lum
bing
Und
ergr
ound
pip
ing
Fire
mai
n se
rvic
eD
rain
age,
wat
er a
nd v
ents
Gas
pip
ing
HVA
C fl
ues
and
vent
sSh
ower
pan
sR
ough
spr
inkl
er p
ipin
gSa
nita
ry a
nd s
torm
pipi
ngB
uild
ing
sew
er a
ndho
use
trap
/sC
onde
nse
drai
nage
Trap
prim
ers
Fire
-pro
ofin
gFi
re-s
topp
ing
Sprin
kler
s/ris
ers
Life
saf
ety
Gen
erat
ors
Fuel
oil
Res
cue
air
HVA
CEx
iting
Pres
suriz
atio
nSt
and
pipe
sFi
re c
onne
ctio
ns
Serv
ice
entr
ance
-con
duit
FIEL
DIN
SPEC
TIO
NS
STA
TEEl
evat
or in
spec
tion
Dire
ct c
all t
oIn
spec
tor/A
genc
y
Centralized/Automated Inspection Scheduling
Onl
ine/
Web
site
December 2007 Page 99
G. CONDOMINIUM CONVERSION
This map guides you through the condominium conversion process from application of physical inspection to final submittal to DPW-BSM.
Star
tN
ew o
rFr
eque
ntC
usto
mer
s.
Dec
embe
r 200
7
BPR
– In
spec
tions
Sub
com
mitt
ee A
s-Is
& T
o-B
e M
appi
ngs:
Con
dom
iniu
m C
onve
rsio
n
App
licat
ion
Logg
edA
ssig
n P
hysi
cal I
nspe
ctio
nnu
mbe
r (1
busi
ness
day
)R
un P
hysi
cal I
nspe
ctio
nre
port
Cal
l and
agr
ee o
n da
te
ASS
ESSO
R’S
OFF
ICE
Is a
pplic
atio
n de
emed
subm
ittab
le?
DPW
DB
I Cod
e En
forc
emen
tSe
ctio
n
Dep
artm
ent o
f Bui
ldin
g In
spec
tion,
Cod
eEn
forc
emen
t Sec
tion
(CES
)8:
00A
M –
5:00
PM
1650
Mis
sion
Str
eet,
Ste.
312
C
Fiel
dIn
spec
tions
App
licat
ion
forP
hysi
cal
Insp
ectio
n Fo
rm
Sen
d
NO
YES
Circ
ulat
e to
City
Age
ncie
s&
Nei
ghbo
rhoo
d
DPW
-B
SM(2
wee
ks N
otic
e)C
oord
inat
e P
hysi
cal I
nspe
ctio
n w
ithD
BI fo
rphy
sica
l ins
pect
ions
(two
wee
ks)
PLA
NN
ING
DEP
AR
TMEN
TR
evie
w fo
r Con
ditio
nal U
se (C
U)
If ap
prov
e, re
ceiv
e co
mm
ents
and
chec
kfo
r tec
hnic
al d
etai
ls.
Che
cker
reco
mm
ends
tent
ativ
em
ap a
ppro
val
Sen
ior a
ppro
ves
tent
ativ
e m
apR
etur
n to
app
lican
t
DEP
AR
TMEN
T O
F B
UIL
DIN
GIN
SPEC
TIO
NO
rder
file
sfro
mm
icro
film
per
mit
sear
ch(1
-2 w
eeks
)E
lect
rical
, Plu
mbi
ng, a
nd B
uild
ing
insp
ectio
ns c
oord
inat
ion
(2 w
eeks
notic
e)S
uper
viso
r rev
iew
(2 b
usin
ess
days
)R
epor
t mai
led.
APP
LIC
AN
TR
ecei
ved
appr
oved
tent
ativ
e m
apAl
so, P
lann
ing
Dep
artm
ent r
eque
stfo
rch
eckp
rint,
tax
certi
ficat
e an
dm
ylar
s
Ret
urn
appr
oved
tent
ativ
e m
ap
Sub
mit
chec
kprin
t, ta
x ce
rtific
ate
and
myl
ars
for
appr
oval
Boa
rd o
f Sup
ervi
sors
Req
uest
& re
ceiv
edS
ubdi
visi
on G
uara
ntee
&Ta
x C
ertif
icat
e(C
ertif
icat
eof
Fin
al C
ompl
etio
n)
PLA
NN
ING
DEP
AR
TMEN
TM
ylar
app
rova
lgr
ante
d
DPW
-B
SMR
eque
st &
rece
ived
Sub
divi
sion
Gua
rant
ee&
Tax
Cer
tific
ate
(Cer
tific
ate
of F
inal
Com
plet
ion)
5un
its o
r mor
eLe
ss th
an 5
uni
ts
Subm
it to
Rec
orde
r’s O
ffice
for
conf
irmat
ion
FIN
ISH
Back
to D
PW
-B
SM
to c
ontin
ue c
ondo
conv
ersi
on p
roce
ss (s
ee D
PW
Con
doC
onve
rsio
n flo
wch
arts
)
DPW
-B
SMW
hen
clea
r, C
ertif
icat
e of
Fin
alC
ompl
etio
n is
sued
December 2007 Page 101
H. TWO-UNIT OWNER OCCUPIED CONVERSIONS / TWO TO SIX-UNIT CONVERSIONS (LOTTERY WINNERS)
The following maps guide you through the process for two-unit owner occupied conversions; and two to six-unit conversions (lottery winners) from first applications eligibility to final map.
SEPARATERECORD OWNERSEACH HOLDING AT
LEAST 25%OWNERSHIP
OCCUPY BOTHUNITS FOR ONE
YEAR
ANY EVICTIONSIN THE BUILDING
SINCE MAY 1 2005?
DETERMINEELIGIBILITY
UNDER ARTICLE 9SECTION 1396.2
NO
YES
1) APPLY TO DBI FOR PHYSICAL INSPECTION2) HIRE A MAP PREPARER3) GO TO WWW.SFDPW.ORG AND PRINT THE CURRENT CONDOAPPLICATION, THESE ARE UPDATED REGULARLY4) BEGIN COLLECTING THE DOCUMENTS REQUESTED IN THEAPPLICATION
YES
GO TO WWW.SFDPW.ORG AND PRINT CONDO APPLICATIONREAD AND FAMILIARIZE YOURSELF WITH THE APPLICATION, MOST QUESTIONS ABOUT THE
PROCESS ARE ADDRESSED IN IT
ELIGIBLE? NO
RETURN WHENELIGIBLE
FILL OUT AND SUBMIT THE CURRENT CITY APPLICATIONPAY SPECIAL ATTENTION TO THE FINALIZING YOUR
APPLICATION SECTION TO AVOID FEES
BEGIN CODECOMPLIANCE WORK
AS SOON AS YOUHAVE YOURPHYSICAL
INSPECTIONREPORT (CFCO
FROM DBIREQUIRED PRIORTO REQUEST FOR
MYLARS)
RECEIVE TENTATIVEMAP APPROVAL
REQUEST FOR CHECKPRINTS & CFCO
PREPARE LEGALDOCUMENTS
(CC&R’S)
REQUEST FINALMYLARS
WHEN THE MYLAR REQUEST IS ISSUED PROVIDE:TAX CERTIFICATERECORDING FEE
BSM SUBMITSMAP TO COUNTY
RECORDER
APPLICANTRECORDS
CC&R’S
CONVERSIONCOMPLETE!!!
AFTER MAPRECORDS
11/7/2007
TO BSM FORREVIEW
11/3
0/20
07
DET
ERM
INE
BU
ILD
ING
ELIG
IBIL
ITY
PER
AR
TIC
LE 9
AN
D O
RD
112
-06
1) A
PPLY
TO
DBI
FO
R P
HY
SIC
ALIN
SPE
CTI
ON
2) H
IRE
A M
APP
RE
PAR
ER
3) G
O T
O W
WW
.SFD
PW
.OR
G A
ND
PR
INT
THE
CU
RR
ENT
CO
ND
OAP
PLI
CAT
ION
, TH
ESE
AR
E U
PDAT
EDR
EGU
LAR
LY4)
BEG
IN C
OLL
ECTI
NG
TH
E D
OC
UM
ENTS
REQ
UES
TED
IN T
HE
APP
LIC
ATIO
N
GO
TO
WW
W.S
FDP
W.O
RG
AN
D P
RIN
T C
ON
DO
AP
PLIC
ATIO
NR
EAD
AN
DFA
MIL
IAR
IZE
YOU
RSE
LF W
ITH
TH
E A
PPLI
CA
TIO
N, M
OST
QU
ESTI
ON
S A
BO
UT
THE
PRO
CES
S A
RE
AD
DR
ESSE
D IN
IT
FILL
OU
T AN
D S
UBM
ITTH
E C
UR
REN
T C
ITY
APPL
ICAT
ION
PAY
SPEC
IAL
ATT
ENTI
ON
TO
TH
E FI
NA
LIZI
NG
YOU
RA
PPLI
CA
TIO
N S
ECTI
ON
TO
AVO
IDFE
ES
BEG
IN C
OD
EC
OM
PLI
ANC
E W
OR
KAS
SO
ON
AS
YO
UH
AVE
YO
UR
PH
YSI
CA
LIN
SP
EC
TIO
NR
EPO
RT
(CFC
O F
RO
MD
BIR
EQ
UIR
ED P
RIO
RTO
REQ
UES
T FO
RM
YLA
RS
)
RE
CEI
VE
TEN
TATI
VE
MAP
AP
PRO
VAL
REQ
UE
ST F
OR
CH
ECK
PR
INT
& C
FCO
PRE
PAR
E L
EGAL
DO
CU
ME
NTS
(CC
&R’S
)
RE
QU
EST
FIN
ALM
YLA
RS
WH
EN
TH
E M
YLA
R R
EQ
UES
T IS
ISSU
EDP
RO
VID
E:
TAX
CER
TIFI
CAT
ER
ECO
RD
ING
FE
E
BSM
SU
BMIT
SM
AP
TOC
OU
NTY
RE
CO
RD
ER
AFTE
R T
HE
MAP
RE
CO
RD
S T
HE
APP
LIC
ANT
RE
CO
RD
S T
HE
CC
&RS
CO
NVE
RS
ION
CO
MPL
ETE!
!!
TO B
SM
FO
RR
EV
IEW
2-4
UN
ITS
ON
E O
WN
ERO
F R
EC
OR
D H
AVI
NG
AT
LEA
ST10
% IN
TER
EST
IN T
HE
PRO
PER
TY O
CC
UP
IES
FOR
THR
EE
YEA
RS
5-6
UN
ITS
3 O
WN
ERS
OF
REC
OR
D H
AV
ING
AT
LEA
ST
10%
INTE
RE
ST IN
TH
E P
RO
PER
TYO
CC
UPI
ES F
OR
TH
REE
YEA
RS
PLA
Y AN
D W
INLO
TTER
Y
YOU
MU
ST M
EET
BO
THTH
E O
WN
ER O
CC
UPA
NC
YA
ND
BU
ILD
ING
ELIG
IBIL
ITY
PRIO
R T
OPL
AYIN
G T
HE
LOTT
ERY
OW
NER
OC
CU
PAN
CY
BU
ILD
ING
ELI
GIB
ILIT
Y
December 2007 Page 104
AUTOMATION
SUBCOMMITTEE REPORT
December 2007 Page 105
AUTOMATION SUBCOMMITTEE
The Automation Subcommittee analyzed the permit review, permit issuance and inspection processes to determine where the application of state-of-the-art technologies should be introduced to improve the work practices of city agencies. The subcommittee’s goal was to make accurate information, covering all aspects of the development review process, more readily accessible to both city staff and the public. This will be achieved by implementing the following recommendations, which will advance city agencies to a more comprehensive and integrated system with improved web based/online services.
I. SWOT ANALYSIS
Strengths • Skills and abilities of staff. • Fast online plumbing and electrical permits. • Ability to file a complaint online. One third of complaints are currently received
online. • Commitment to technology and financial resources. • Record-keeping of final drawings (disks, DVDs, digital transmission). • Keep up with changing technology that is very informative and is available to the
public. • DBI Permit Tracking System (PTS) design flexibility. • DBI PTS enables data collection from multiple users. • DBI online PTS easy to use by other agencies. • DBI Management Information Systems (MIS) very impressive. • Vast amount of information available online. • Track/credit training advances, continuous online training. • Public notification at website and online. • Email announcements for in-house and outreach training/presentation. • Off-hours schedule available online (Electrical Inspection Division). • Planning Department website has specific contact names and telephone numbers,
especially for plan review (can be used as DBI model).
Weaknesses • PTS is not intuitive. PTS access rights block users from making
clerical/typographical changes. • Lack of integration between department databases. Multiple databases reveal
inconsistencies and undermine confidence in what data are accurate. Example: Unable to access Housing Inspection Services data. Address information needs to be more accurate and coordinated with block and lot (which changes). Linkage among multiple disciplines. Lack of coordination among other city departments.
December 2007 Page 106
• Lack of an integrated document management system to track email correspondence, document list, plan review comments, etc.
• Unable to record Planning Department’s conditions in the DBI PTS. • Inaccurate parcel/building information from the applicant at the very beginning of a
project for all reviewing agencies. • Internal system changes, due to poor maintenance (system dates back to 2000,
staffing, funding, software, etc.) • System fails to alert PTS users on activity at any specific address and does not
provide linkage among multiple permits. User interface not friendly when looking up information on multiple permits on any address.
• Disabled Access Compliance Status Documentation AB-056 is not recorded on PTS. • Inability to make quick changes to computer system to better administer and manage
compliance and legislation. • Need for constant review and appropriate budgeting to fund required changes. • Inability to use technology for field staff to record updates/information to avoid delays
in data entry. No mobile device solutions for field inspectors. • Inability to add industry software and systems. • Website is not user-friendly (including organization, layout). Features such as
frequently asked questions (FAQs) are limited. • Inspection and special inspection status and/or requirements not online. • Inability to schedule regular and overtime inspections online. • Unable to process multiple plumbing and electrical applications online at the
same time. • Fees assessed are not consistent with actual personnel time required or real DBI
costs. Unable to obtain preliminary fee estimates for specific projects. • The impact of plan revisions on all review agencies. • Microfilm and storage quality. Document management is poor; job cards filled in
by hand rather than automatically from the system. • No automated notification of expiring, pending and approved permits, or required
inspections (180 calendar days), cancelled projects. • Inability to include code and time requirements, Americans with Disabilities Act
(ADA) requirements, etc. in PTS system. • Several shortcomings with the email system, such as speed, functionality and
storage restrictions. • No automated “tagging” system to eliminate ‘lost’ plans and lack of security for
plans. • Different physical locations for revisions, DPH, SFRA, etc. • Flag neighborhood issues due to construction timing (automate communications,
schedule among departments). • Lack of document search engine (no access to Google/security issue). • No telephone system contacts and cell phone for field personnel.
December 2007 Page 107
Opportunities • Opportunity for DBI to survey customers to determine what the best business
practices are. Adopt new procedures where feasible. • Opportunity to collaborate with industry and benefit from its advanced changes,
new information, etc. • Review the Planning Department’s access to property documentation and explore
any template use for DBI. • Train staff in new technology. • Streamline process to address customer needs. • Opportunity to incorporate new code changes as they are adopted. • Improve emergency services communication and online submissions. • Sort public calls according to caller’s specific needs and integrate DBI’s services with
the new “311 Call Center” services.
Threats • Financial constraints for extensive systems change and continuous maintenance. • Management of information and cooperation among different city departments. • Lack of staff and resources. • Overly focused on automation and lose sight of main purpose (review and approve
permits). • Automation failing in emergency situations, increasing dependency on
computers.
December 2007 Page 108
II. ANALYSIS OF BENCHMARKING SURVEY AND STAKEHOLDER SURVEY
Benchmarking Survey from Other Cities:
Of the 31 jurisdictions that were contacted, representatives from eight responded.
The respondents were from:
• Montreal, Quebec, Canada • St. Paul, Minnesota • Honolulu, Hawaii • Portland, Oregon • Miami, Florida • Long Beach, California • Clark County, Nevada • Irvine, California
Findings:
1. All customers and employees were satisfied to somewhat satisfied with their
systems.
2. All employees said their system was somewhat user-friendly and required little training.
3. Most jurisdictions chose an off-the-shelf permit tracking system. Vendors included
Eden Inforum Gold, POSSE/ Computronix, HTE, Tidemark, PG Mensys, AMANDA, ACCELA.
4. Phased implementation was the most common approach when switching over to their
new system. All had their legacy data migrated into the new system.
5. The other jurisdictions automated system also tracked the plan review and inspection functions/services of the Planning Department, Fire Department, Public Works, Redevelopment, and Assessor’s Office.
6. The following services were automated: Permit Application, Permit Issuance,
Permit Tracking Status, Project Tracking (multiple permits), Property Profile Information, and Complaint Tracking.
7. The following services were available online: Permit Tracking Status, Property
Profile Information, Permit Application, Geographic Information Systems (GIS).
8. Jurisdictions that utilize mobile devices by their field staff used laptop computers such as Panasonic Toughbooks, Fujitsu Lifebook, and tablets, not handheld devices. Only half were synchronized to the database.
9. Most jurisdictions had basic system administration, routine maintenance and
application workflows supported by in-house staff. No jurisdiction had their systems supported solely by the vendor, consultants or manufacturer.
December 2007 Page 109
10. Most systems provide automated checks and balances for the following functions: a. Validation of permit application information (i.e., verification of property details
provided by customer against a municipal property information database). b. Notifications/alerts to flag potential concerns that need attention prior to issuance
of a permit (i.e., violations, code enforcement activity, etc.). c. Automated fee calculation and verification of payment prior to permit issuance.
11. Most systems have standard back-up of data stored off-site with necessary downtime
for restoration. 12. Most jurisdictions spread their automated system cost among initial development,
implementation, annual license fees and annual maintenance fees.
13. Positive feedback from staff regarding their system included: reliability, consistency, expandability, easy to track down all information about one building.
14. Negative feedback from staff regarding their system included: too much information
required to be entered; higher performance expectations from the public; system could be more user-friendly; and lack of system flexibility.
Stakeholder Survey from Customers:
29 responses from stakeholders were received. Stakeholders included architects, engineers, contractors, permit applicants and one city employee.
Designers (architects, engineers) 5 Contractors and sub-contractors) 13
Permit Applicants 10 City Employees 1
TOTAL 29
Findings
1. The top five web-based services the stakeholders would like to use include: permit
application, permit tracking status, electronic plan submittal, permit issuance and inspection scheduling.
2. Information stakeholders would like to have readily available include: complete
permit history; DBI property database (owner, floor area, site size and current assessment); code updates, interpretations and rulings; online help question with technical services, and plan review; appointments for pre-application reviews; detailed descriptions of work; complaint tracking; inspection scheduling; automatic fee calculator; payment of fees and project tracking; plot map information; planning issues such as historical ratings of existing structures; automated notifications of new DBI guidelines.
3. Most stakeholders are willing to pay an additional fee (automation surcharge) if
they were offered enhanced web-based services.
December 2007 Page 110
4. A third of the stakeholders have used some form of web-based services in other jurisdictions including San Jose, Oakland, Sonoma County, and Santa Clara.
5. Some features stakeholders would like an automated permit tracking system to
incorporate are: ability to access accurate building profiles and permit history; automatic email notifications to applicants; ability to view plans; photographs and plan review comments online; and to view current status of permit and/or inspections online.
December 2007 Page 111
III. AUTOMATION FINDINGS
During the BPR process the Automation Subcommittee recorded a list of findings from each meeting. The subcommittees of Plan Review and Permit issuance and Inspection also recorded automation related findings during their meetings. Below are the automation related general findings as well as findings from other subcommittees.
A. GENERAL FINDINGS
• System does not prompt for information needed to eliminate human error and
inaccurate information. • Systems and database from different agencies are not integrated into DBI PTS. • Email server too slow and size of accounts too small. • Internal system changes are time consuming due to poor maintenance (system
dates back to 2000, lack of staffing, funding, software, etc.). • Automated notifications to customer/owner/staff/neighbors for different stages of
the permit application, including cancellation. PTS to count days, print reminder, email of permit issuance, expiration, etc.
• Unable to add industry software. • Planning Department does not schedule hearings, instead uses email notification
only. • Board of Appeals not automated. Appeal numbers are assigned manually in
chronological order. Reliance on paper back-up. BPA is an independent agency and not connected to DBI server.
• Complete DBI Public Information Counter information not online. • Hours are tracked via PTS, but team leaders are unable to track plan review
hours. • Ideally 80% of processes computerized. • Inability for MIS to make quick changes to computer system to better administer
and manage compliance and legislation. • PTS does not properly detail the potential size of the project. (i.e., 500 sprinkler
heads vs. 10).
B. PLAN REVIEW AND PERMIT ISSUANCE FINDINGS
• Complicated permit process for staff, customers and general public. • Unable to estimate actual permit fee. • Inflexible PTS does not record revisions to approved permits and allow additional
fields for more detailed information. For example, special inspections, Planning Department conditions of approval etc…
• No automated “tagging” system to eliminate ‘lost’ plans, lack of security for plans. • Inability to include code and time requirements, ADA requirements, etc. in PTS
system.
December 2007 Page 112
• The Planning Department does not have clerks to enter permit information. Planners are entering data but have to verify that there are no double entries for a project.
• PTS does not provide tracking mechanism to link related information to a specific project.
• SFFD plan review and inspection procedures are not automated. Rescue air system, water-flow and SFFD flow requirements online payment, Water Department maps of water mains/fire hydrants in the city, water meter request/removal approval from Water Department, fire flow problems, record of all high rise buildings, smoke control buildings, scheduling of appointment with payment, SFFD violations, customer education and downloads, plan submittal guidelines are not recorded in a computer database.
• Information regarding property profile is located in different locations in Division Applications.
• No monetary charges are made by DBI despite all initial work and reviews done by permitting agencies. Client may decide to discontinue.
• No feature in PTS to automatically route plans and permit applications. • Undocumented process for creating address, including new address, block and lot
number, and all other issues relating to address. • City agency fees are collected at different locations outside DBI. • Unable to apply for two separate plumbing/electrical permits online simultaneously.
Contractor’s data is required to be re-entered for each permit. • Block and lot maps from CPB are not digital. • Multiple permit tracking systems, (i.e., DPW, SFFD, DPH, etc.) that track permit
data differently and are not linked. • Complaints on properties prevent online plumbing and electrical permits from being
issued until abated (regardless of date of complaint and/or validity). • Complaints and/or Notice of Violations are not updated on PTS even after a
complaint or Notice of Violation has been abated. • Memorandum from DBI regarding minimum criteria for review, not on DBI
website. Planning Department’s requirements may differ from DBI’s. • DBI does not have a streamlined process for registration, renewals, and
extensions.
C. INSPECTION FINDINGS
• Eliminate duplications and help communication in field/industry with the benefit of mobile devices.
• Linkage among multiple disciplines (i.e., Housing, SFFD Headquarters, Planning Department, Assessor’s Office, DPH, SFRA, DPW, DPW-BSM) does not exist.
• No online scheduling for special inspection. • Inability to schedule regular and overtime inspections online. • Electrical and Housing Inspectors enter field data after supervisor review. Support
staff enters revisions.
December 2007 Page 113
• Multiple inspectors may investigate same complaint (no PTS coordination). There is a lack of policy, documentation, procedures, and automation among different divisions in DBI to update complaints.
• Job card information unavailable online. Insufficient space to register all notes on job card.
• Communication via email between inspectors and customers unavailable. • Contractors and customers cannot go online to view their scheduled inspection
time. • Unable to schedule inspections and view inspector availability online.
December 2007 Page 114
IV. AUTOMATION SUBCOMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS
A. INTEGRATED PERMIT TRACKING SYSTEM
1. System to provide work flow tracking and ability to track status from application submission to Certificate of Final Completion and Occupancy (CFC).
2. Integrate databases from different divisions, departments and agencies (i.e.,
Housing Inspection Services, SFFD Headquarters, Planning Department, Assessor’s Office, DPH, SFRA, DPW, DPW-BSM, etc.)
3. System to be capable of aggregating all pertinent information for any particular
property/building. (Existing complaints/NOVs (HIS, BID, EID, PID), historical status, number of units, stories, type of construction, year built etc.).
4. Consolidate legal city address database among Assessor’s Office, DBI, DPW-
BSM. (Inter-departmental subcommittee to coordinate implementation of the various addressing processes like new address or change in existing addresses.) Provide real time block and lot maps online and integrate block and lot maps from other city agencies.
5. System to collect and distribute fees for other city agencies involved with the
permitting process. 6. System to have a well documented user manual/guide in conjunction with the
business policies and procedures manual. 7. System to provide a smart permit numbering system.
B. IMPLEMENT AUTOMATED CUSTOMER TRACKING SYSTEM
1. Ability to track customer wait-times. 2. Ability to intelligently route customer based on wait times. 3. Ability for customer to “wait” in multiple lines. True parallel or “shotgun” review. 4. Ability to store customer information and transfer data into a permit tracking system
if customer files for permit. 5. Ensure customer flow to eliminate bottlenecks.
C. ONLINE SERVICES
1. Provide centralized application forms from various city agencies online and the
ability to enter project information and start application process online. 2. Increase the types of permits that can be issued online.
December 2007 Page 115
3. Enhanced inspection scheduling for all disciplines. Inspection scheduling to integrate IVR or web-based system with PTS. Options to schedule inspections for other departments SFFD, DPW, DBI, etc.
4. Provide real time inspection history for projects. 5. Ability to view a customer’s required special inspections for current projects. 6. Provide list of frequently asked questions regarding the permitting process, code
interpretations, submittal requirements, guidelines and checklists online. 7. Ability to check expected turnaround times, project status, assigned plans
examiner, number of hours reviewed, name of supervisor, and view plan review comments.
8. 3R Report requests submittal to be made available online with acceptance of
online payments and receipt issuance.
D. AUTOMATE PLAN REVIEW SERVICES 1. System to automate and notify owner/staff/neighbors of all important project
timeframes i.e., expiration of plan review, expiration of permit renewals, permit renewals and extensions, TCO, NOV, turnaround times, escalation mechanisms, routing templates, all milestones in a project lifetime for all review stations (i.e., Planning Department, MOD, SFPUC etc.).
2. System to track staff’s comments, determinations, and conditions of approval.
3. System to have real time access to other agency databases State Contractors
Licensing Board, Workers’ Compensation, Business Tax Registration Certificate, etc.
4. Expand routing to show specifically what stage of Planning Department review
the project is in (notification stage or hearing dates, etc.).
5. System to provide the ability to track plans – subcommittee to look into various plan tracking mechanism like RFID barcode, labeling, check-in and check-out, etc.
E. AUTOMATE INSPECTION SERVICES
1. Provide field inspectors with cellular phones. 2. Provide field inspectors with latest devices like hand-held devices to record field
inspections, update complaint status, NOV, correction notices, etc.
3. System to have built-in links to various portion of the process to place ‘holds’ for inspections or other functions.
December 2007 Page 116
F. DOCUMENT MANAGEMENT SYSTEM
1. System to provide document management capability as a built-in or an optional plug-in outside product.
2. System to provide ability to scan and store imaged documents and electronic files
(e.g., CAD filings, microfilm, photographs, other binary or ASCII files) in virtual folders and associate them with any object in the system (e.g., property, person, complaint, case, etc.).
3. System to encompass electronic plan submittal, review, and approval
mechanisms with version tracking and auditing capabilities and digital rights management capabilities.
CONCLUSION TO RECOMMENDATIONS
The implementation of automation subcommittee’s recommendations should come after the BPR implementation to minimize iterations and maximize efficiency.
December 2007 Page 117
V. MAPPING The following “As-Is” maps developed by other subcommittees illustrate the lack of automation in the current plan review, permit issuance, and inspection processes.
“AS-IS” MAPPING ISSUES
1. Customer does not have a dedicated initial point of contact. 2. Customer pulls multiple numbers at each review station and has to wait in each
station serial fashion. No intelligent routing based on wait times.
3. DBI is unable to track applicant wait times.
4. DBI is unable to determine all pertinent building information. (Easements, stories, type of construction, year built etc.).
5. City agencies within the Permit Center are located on numerous floors.
6. Intake counter and plan review staff are not provided with comprehensive
application completeness and plan review checklist.
7. Functions CPB are not clearly defined.
8. Not all city agencies involved in the permitting process are located within Permit Center (i.e., SFPUC, MOD, SFRA, DPH, San Francisco Unified School District {SFUSD}). Some permit applications must be routed outside the building.
9. Addresses with notice of violations are required to be routed to a Senior Inspector
for that discipline.
10. Multiple permit application forms for different types of permits. All are required to be filled out by hand and later re-typed into a computer when permit is approved.
11. SFUSD, SFPUC, DPW-BSM and other fees are not collected at one centralized
location (DBI).
Sept
embe
r 4, 2
007
BP
R -
Auto
mat
ion
Sub
com
mitt
eeA
s-Is
Map
ping
:Cen
tral P
erm
it B
urea
u(C
PB
) Sim
ple
Per
mit
With
out P
lans
– O
ver-
The-
Cou
nter
(OTC
)
Sim
ple
Perm
itw
ithou
t Pla
nsO
TC
Cen
tral P
erm
itB
urea
u8:
00 A
M –
4:30
PM
558-
6070
Sig
n in
on
Pink
Clip
boar
dW
aitti
me
:20
min
utes
~ 2
hou
rs(M
anua
l Clip
boar
d)
Cal
ls D
istri
ctIn
spec
tor t
oS
tart
Wor
k
WO
RK
UN
DE
RW
AY
1408
Cle
rical
Sta
ff re
view
sfo
r com
plet
enes
s an
dac
cura
cy(M
anua
lPr
oces
s)
Ent
ers
all i
nfor
mat
ionr
mat
ion
into
Per
mit
Trac
king
Syst
em, i
nclu
ding
valu
atio
n, ro
utin
gof
revi
ew p
roce
ss,
othe
rinf
orm
atio
nrm
atio
nfr
om A
gent
Dis
clos
ure
Form
, R
-1 T
enan
t Dis
loca
tion
Form
,Ow
ner-
Bui
lder
Dec
lara
tion
Ass
igns
Per
mit
Appl
icat
ion
Num
ber(
in P
TS)
Blo
ck a
nd lo
t, oc
cupa
ncy
clas
s,un
it co
unt r
esea
rch
on A
VS,
map
s,pe
rmit
hist
ory,
etc
.…
Ver
ifies
gen
eral
info
rmat
ion
such
as
bloc
k an
d lo
t/add
ress
,oc
cupa
ncy
clas
s/us
e
Pla
n E
xam
iner
cor
rect
s
Ver
ifies
sign
atur
es a
nd p
rope
rro
utin
g on
form
.(M
anua
l Pro
cess
)
Ret
urns
to C
PB
Wro
ng in
form
atio
n
No
supp
ortin
g do
cum
ents
.M
ore
rese
arch
mus
t be
done
to fi
nd/a
dd a
ddre
ssM
anua
l pro
cess
of s
earc
hing
thro
ugh
bloc
k an
dlo
t pro
cess
Che
ck S
tate
Con
tract
ors’
Lic
ense
,S
F B
usin
ess
Tax
Reg
istra
tion,
and
Wor
kers
’Com
pens
atio
n (if
need
ed) i
n C
ontra
ctor
info
rmat
ion
Dat
abas
eC
heck
for a
bove
in P
TS.S
tate
/BT
syst
ems
not d
irect
lylin
ked
Firs
t tim
e C
ontra
ctor
app
lyin
gW
ith n
o pr
oof o
f doc
umen
tatio
nor
Exp
ired
licen
ses/
insu
ranc
e
Sta
te C
ontra
ctor
’s L
icen
se B
oard
Not
link
ed w
ith D
BI’s
sys
tem
Mus
t ren
ew a
ndre
turn
with
pro
of
Insu
ranc
e
City
Hal
l Tax
Col
lect
or’s
Offi
ce8:
00 A
M –
5:00
PM
Not
link
ed w
ith D
BI’s
sys
tem
Per
mit
with
Con
tract
orU
ndec
lare
d
Returnto CPB with proper documents
Paym
ent b
y ca
sh, c
heck
,Vi
sa o
r Mas
terC
ard.
Ente
r dat
a in
to P
TS.
Proc
ess
onPO
S.
Prin
t Per
mit
(in P
TS),
Fill
out J
ob C
ard
with
appl
icat
ion
num
ber a
nd e
xpira
tion
date
. Atta
ch o
ther
info
rmat
ion
such
as
“Gen
eral
info
rmat
ion
abou
tC
onst
ruct
ion
inS
an F
ranc
isco
” and
SF
Env
ironm
ent
broc
hure
on
Con
stru
ctio
n/D
emol
ition
Was
tepr
oced
ures
(Man
ual p
roce
ss)
If pa
ying
by
Com
pany
Cre
dit C
ard,
Mus
thav
e C
ompa
ny’s
Aut
horiz
atio
n Le
tter
If pr
oble
m, s
end
to o
rigin
al p
lan
revi
ewer
Cor
rect
edR
etur
ns to
CP
B
Che
ck d
ata
ente
red
byS
tatio
n2
OTC
cou
nter
or 4
th F
loor
is c
orre
ct(M
anua
l Pro
cess
)
Issu
es p
erm
it,in
PTS
Job
card
, and
giv
es to
cus
tom
er
Oth
er C
PB D
utie
s:A
nsw
er m
isce
llane
ous
ques
tions
Add
ress
ass
ignm
ents
Pro
vide
plan
s un
der 1
5-da
y ho
ld to
view
300'
Mai
l of p
rinci
pal p
ortio
n (D
BI
polic
y)E
xpire
d pe
rmit
rene
wal
sE
xten
sion
of p
erm
its s
tillu
nder
filin
gN
otic
e of
Per
mit
Can
cella
tion
/Le
tter o
fDis
appr
oval
Per
mit
With
draw
alM
aint
ain
list o
fnot
ifica
tions
Bili
ngua
l tra
nsla
tion
Cha
nge
owne
r/con
tract
orR
efun
dsM
eetin
gs, t
rain
ings
Sto
rage
Roo
m to
be
Mic
rofil
med
Pic
ked
up b
y P
ublic
Ser
vice
s D
ivis
ion
Sta
ff
Lege
nd:A
UTO
MA
TIO
N C
OM
MEN
TAR
Yar
e in
Blu
e Ita
lic
Sept
embe
r 4,2
007
BP
R –
Aut
omat
ion
Sub
com
mitt
ee A
s-Is
Map
ping
: Cen
tral P
erm
it B
urea
u S
impl
e (C
PB
) Per
mit
With
Pla
ns –
Ove
r-Th
e-C
ount
er (O
TC)
Sim
ple
Perm
itw
ith P
lans
OTC
Cen
tral P
erm
itB
urea
u8:
00 A
M –
4:30
PM
558-
6070
Take
a n
umbe
rW
aitti
me
: 30
min
utes
~ 2
hou
rs
Cal
ls D
istri
ct In
spec
tor t
oS
tart
Wor
k
WO
RK
UN
DE
RW
AY
1408
Cle
rical
Sta
ffre
view
s fo
rco
mpl
eten
ess
and
accu
racy
(Man
ual P
roce
ss)
Ent
ers
all i
nfor
mat
ion
into
Per
mit
Trac
king
Sys
tem
,ro
utin
g of
revi
ewpr
oces
s, o
ther
info
rmat
ion
from
Age
ntD
iscl
osur
e Fo
rm,R
-1 T
enan
tDis
loca
tion
Form
, Ow
ner-
Bui
lder
Dec
lara
tion
4th fl
oor s
taff
Assi
gns
Per
mit
App
licat
ion
Num
ber i
n P
TS.
CPB
Staf
f writ
enu
mbe
r on
the
pape
rap
plic
atio
n
Blo
ck a
nd L
ot, o
ccup
ancy
clas
s, u
nit c
ount
rese
arch
on
AVS
, map
s, p
erm
it hi
stor
y,et
c. …
Ver
ifies
gen
eral
info
rmat
ion
such
as
bloc
k an
d lo
tadd
ress
,oc
cupa
ncy
clas
s/us
e
Pla
n E
xam
iner
cor
rect
s
Ver
ifies
sign
atur
es a
nd p
rope
rro
utin
g on
form
.Lo
ok a
t pla
ns fo
r cor
rect
/co
mpl
eten
ess/
disc
repa
ncy
(Man
ual P
roce
ss)
Ret
urns
to C
PB
Wro
ng in
form
atio
n
No
supp
ortin
g do
cum
ents
.M
ore
rese
arch
mus
t be
done
to fi
nd/a
dd a
ddre
ssM
anua
l pro
cess
of s
earc
hing
thro
ugh
bloc
k an
d lo
t map
sP
icks
up
daily
from
2nd
floo
r bin
Che
ck S
tate
Con
tract
ors’
Lic
ense
,S
F B
usin
ess
Tax
Reg
istra
tion,
and
W
orke
rs’ C
ompe
nsat
ion
(if n
eede
d)in
Con
tract
or In
form
atio
n D
atab
ase
Che
ck fo
r abo
ve in
PTS
. S
tate
/BT
syst
ems
not d
irect
lylin
ked
Firs
t tim
e C
ontra
ctor
app
lyin
gW
ith n
o pr
oof o
f doc
umen
tatio
nor
Exp
ired
licen
ses/
insu
ranc
e
Sta
te C
ontra
ctor
’s L
icen
se B
oard
Not
link
ed w
ith D
BI’s
sys
tem M
ust r
enew
and
retu
rn w
ith p
roof
Insu
ranc
e
City
Hal
l Tax
Col
lect
or’s
Offi
ce8:
00 A
M –
5:00
PM
Not
link
ed w
ith D
BI’s
sys
tem
Per
mit
with
Con
tract
orU
ndec
lare
d
Returnto CPB with proper documents
Paym
ent b
yca
sh, c
heck
,Vi
sa o
rMas
terC
ard.
Ente
r dat
a in
to P
TS.
Proc
ess
on P
OS.
Prin
t Per
mit
in P
TS,F
ill o
ut J
ob C
ard
with
appl
icat
ion
num
ber a
nd e
xpira
tion
date
. Atta
ch o
ther
info
rmat
ion
such
as
“Gen
eral
Info
rmat
ion
abou
tC
onst
ruct
ion
inS
an F
ranc
isco
” and
SF
Envi
ronm
ent
broc
hure
on
Con
stru
ctio
n/D
emol
ition
Was
tepr
oced
ures
(Man
ual P
roce
ss)
If pa
ying
by
Com
pany
Cre
dit C
ard,
Mus
t hav
e C
ompa
ny’s
Aut
horiz
atio
n Le
tter
Ifpr
oble
m, s
end
to o
rigin
alP
lan
Exam
iner
Ret
urns
to C
PB
Che
ck d
ata
ente
red
by
4th F
loor
isco
rrec
t –M
anua
lpr
oces
s
Che
ck fo
r fee
s du
e an
d pa
idfo
r fro
m S
F U
nifie
d S
choo
lD
istri
ct, T
IDF,
etc
…(M
anua
l Che
ckin
g)
Che
ck E
ngin
eer/A
rchi
tect
’slic
ense
num
ber s
tam
ped
on
all s
heet
sof
pla
ns(M
anua
l Pro
cess
)
Che
ck O
SH
A, B
AA
QM
D“J
num
ber”
For d
emol
ition
,wor
kshe
etfro
m D
epar
tmen
tof
Env
ironm
ent
Pay
fees
at o
ther
age
ncie
s
Writ
e P
erm
itA
pplic
atio
nnu
mbe
r at e
nd o
f pla
n sh
eets
Mis
sing
sta
mps
CP
Bba
ck ro
omst
orag
e fo
r to
be
mic
rofil
med
(Pic
ked
up b
y PS
D S
taff)
Other stampedand signedset
to CPB back room
Issu
es p
erm
it,in
PTS
Job
card
( han
d-w
ritte
non
har
d co
py),
and
giv
es o
ne s
etof
pla
ns to
cus
tom
erO
ther
CPB
Dut
ies:
Ans
wer
mis
cella
neou
squ
estio
nsA
ddre
ss a
ssig
nmen
tsP
rovi
de p
lans
und
er15
-day
hol
d to
vie
w30
0'M
ail o
f prin
cipa
lpor
tion
(DB
I pol
icy)
Exp
ired
perm
itre
new
als
Ext
ensi
onof
per
mits
still
und
er fi
ling
Not
ice
of P
erm
it C
ance
llatio
n / L
ette
r ofD
isap
prov
alP
erm
it W
ithdr
awal
Mai
ntai
nlis
t of n
otifi
catio
nsB
iling
ual t
rans
latio
nC
hang
e ow
ner/c
ontra
ctor
Ref
unds
Mee
tings
, tra
inin
gs
Lege
nd:A
UTO
MA
TIO
N C
OM
MEN
TAR
Y ar
e in
Blu
e Ita
lic
Aug
ust 1
5, 2
007
BP
R –
Aut
omat
ion
Sub
com
mitt
ee A
s-Is
Map
ping
: Cen
tral P
erm
it B
urea
u (C
PB
) Fili
ng -
Add
ition
s
STA
RT
Hor
izon
tal/
Vert
ical
Add
ition
Rea
dy fo
r Int
ake/
Filin
g
Cen
tral P
erm
itB
urea
u8:
00 A
M –
4:30
PM
558-
6070
Take
a n
umbe
rW
aitti
me
: 30
min
utes
~ 2
hou
rs
1408
Cle
rical
Sta
ffre
view
s fo
rco
mpl
eten
ess
and
accu
racy
Ent
ers
all i
nfor
mat
ion
into
Per
mit
Trac
king
Sys
tem
,in
clud
ing
valu
atio
n, ro
utin
g of
revi
ewpr
oces
s, o
ther
info
rmat
ion
from
Age
nt D
iscl
osur
e Fo
rm, R
-1 T
enan
tD
islo
catio
n Fo
rm, O
wne
r-B
uild
er D
ecla
ratio
n
Ass
igns
Per
mit
Appl
icat
ion
Num
ber
Blo
ck a
nd lo
t, oc
cupa
ncy
clas
s,
unit
coun
t res
earc
h on
AV
S,
map
s,pe
rmit
hist
ory,
etc
.
Ver
ifies
gen
eral
info
rmat
ion
such
as
bloc
k an
d lo
t/add
ress
,oc
cupa
ncy
clas
s/us
e
Pla
n E
xam
iner
cor
rect
s
Ver
ifies
sign
atur
es a
nd p
rope
rro
utin
g on
form
.Lo
ok a
t pla
ns fo
r cor
rect
/co
mpl
eten
ess/
disc
repa
ncy
Ret
urns
to C
PB
Wro
ng in
form
atio
n
No
supp
ortin
g do
cum
ents
.M
ore
rese
arch
mus
t be
done
to fi
nd/a
dd a
ddre
ss C
heck
Sta
te C
ontra
ctor
s’Li
cens
e, S
F B
usin
ess
Tax
Reg
istra
tion,
and
Wor
kers
’C
ompe
nsat
ion
(ifne
eded
) in
Con
tract
or In
form
atio
nD
atab
ase
Dat
abas
es n
ot li
nk a
nd n
o re
al-
time
upda
tes
Firs
ttim
e C
ontra
ctor
app
lyin
gW
ithno
pro
of o
f doc
umen
tatio
nor
Exp
ired
licen
ses/
insu
ranc
e
Sta
te C
ontra
ctor
’s L
icen
seB
oard
Not
link
edto
DB
I’s s
yste
m
Mus
t ren
ewan
d re
turn
with
pro
of
Insu
ranc
eN
ot li
nked
to D
BI’s
sys
tem
City
Hal
lTa
x C
olle
ctor
’s O
ffice
8:00
AM
–5:
00P
MN
ot li
nked
to D
BI’s
sys
tem
Per
mit
with
Con
tract
orU
ndec
lare
d
Return to CPB withproper documents
Pay
men
t by
cash
, che
ck,V
isa
or M
aste
rCar
d.E
nter
dat
a in
to P
TS.
Pro
cess
on
PO
S.
Han
d w
rites
Pla
n C
heck
Rec
eipt
and
give
s to
Cus
tom
erC
usto
mer
fills
out
Yel
low
Pos
tcar
d
If pa
ying
by C
ompa
ny C
redi
tCar
d,M
ust h
ave
Com
pany
’s A
utho
rizat
ion
Lette
r
If pr
oble
m, s
end
to o
rigin
al P
lan
Exam
iner
Cor
rect
ions
Mad
eR
etur
ns to
CP
B
Che
ck d
ata
ente
red
by4th
Flo
or is
corr
ect
Che
ck E
ngin
eer/A
rchi
tect
’slic
ense
num
ber s
tam
ped
on
all s
heet
sof
pla
ns
Writ
e P
erm
itA
pplic
atio
nnu
mbe
r at
end
of p
lan
shee
ts
Mis
sing
sta
mps
Sen
ds P
erm
itA
pplic
atio
n an
d P
lans
To n
ext s
tatio
n on
rout
ing
slip
FIN
ISH
Oth
er C
PB D
utie
s:A
nsw
er m
isce
llane
ous
ques
tions
Add
ress
ass
ignm
ents
Pro
vide
pla
nsun
der1
5-da
y ho
ld to
view
300'
Mai
l of p
rinci
pal p
ortio
n(D
BI
polic
y)E
xpire
d pe
rmit
rene
wal
sE
xten
sion
of p
erm
its s
tillu
nder
filin
gN
otic
e of
Per
mit
Can
cella
tion/
Lette
r of D
isap
prov
alP
erm
it w
ithdr
awal
Mai
ntai
nlis
t of n
otifi
catio
nsB
iling
ual t
rans
latio
nC
hang
e ow
ner/c
ontra
ctor
Ref
unds
Mee
tings
, tra
inin
gs
Lege
nd:A
UTO
MA
TIO
N C
OM
MEN
TAR
Y ar
e in
Blu
e Ita
lic
Aug
ust 1
5,20
07
BP
R –
Aut
omat
ion
Sub
com
mitt
ee A
s-Is
Map
ping
: Cen
tral P
erm
it B
urea
u (C
PB
) Fili
ng N
ew C
onst
ruct
ion
with
Dem
oliti
on
STA
RT
Rea
ding
for F
iling
Cen
tral P
erm
itB
urea
u8:
00 A
M –
4:30
PM
558-
6070
Take
a n
umbe
rW
aitti
me
: 30
min
utes
~ 2
hou
rs
1408
Cle
rical
Sta
ffre
view
s fo
rco
mpl
eten
ess
and
accu
racy
Ent
ers
all i
nfor
mat
ion
into
Per
mit
Trac
king
Sys
tem
,in
clud
ing
valu
atio
n,ro
utin
g of
revi
ew p
roce
ss, o
ther
info
rmat
ion
from
Age
nt D
iscl
osur
e Fo
rm, O
wne
rB
uild
er D
ecla
ratio
n, In
clus
iona
ryH
ousi
ngR
equi
rem
ents
, etc
. ..
Ass
igns
Per
mit
App
licat
ion
Num
ber
Blo
ck a
nd lo
t, oc
cupa
ncy
clas
s,
unit
coun
t res
earc
h on
AV
S,
map
s,pe
rmit
hist
ory,
etc
. …
Ver
ifies
gen
eral
info
rmat
ion
such
as
bloc
kan
d lo
t, oc
cupa
ncy
clas
s/us
e, m
etes
/bou
nds,
diag
ram
on
perm
itap
plic
atio
n
Pla
n E
xam
iner
cor
rect
s
Ver
ifies
sign
atur
es a
nd p
rope
rro
utin
g on
form
.Lo
ok a
t pla
ns fo
r cor
rect
/co
mpl
eten
ess/
disc
repa
ncy
Ret
urns
to C
PB
Wro
ng in
form
atio
n
No
supp
ortin
g do
cum
ents
.M
ore
rese
arch
mus
t be
done
to re
solv
e is
sue
Che
ck S
tate
Con
tract
ors’
Lice
nse,
SF
Bus
ines
s Ta
xR
egis
tratio
n, a
nd W
orke
rs’
Com
p (if
nee
ded)
inC
ontra
ctor
Info
rmat
ion
Dat
abas
eD
atab
ases
not
link
ed, n
ore
al-ti
me
upda
tes
Firs
t tim
e C
ontra
ctor
app
lyin
gW
ith n
o pr
oof o
f doc
umen
tatio
nor
Exp
ired
licen
ses/
insu
ranc
e
Sta
te C
ontra
ctor
’s L
icen
seB
oard
Not
link
ed w
ith D
BI’s
sys
tem
Mus
t ren
ewan
d re
turn
with
pro
of
Insu
ranc
eN
ot li
nked
with
DB
I’s s
yste
m
City
Hal
lTa
x C
olle
ctor
’s O
ffice
8:00
AM
–5:
00P
MN
ot li
nked
with
DB
I’s s
yste
m
Per
mit
with
Con
tract
orU
ndec
lare
d
Return to CPB withproper documents
Pay
men
t by
cash
, che
ck,V
isa
or M
aste
rCar
d.E
nter
dat
a in
to P
TS.
Pro
cess
on
PO
S.
Han
dw
rite
Pla
n C
heck
rece
ipta
ndgi
ve to
Cus
tom
erC
usto
mer
writ
e Y
ello
w P
ostc
ard
If pa
ying
by
Com
pany
Cre
dit C
ard,
Mus
t hav
e C
ompa
ny’s
Aut
horiz
atio
n Le
tter
Ifpr
oble
m,s
end
to o
rigin
al P
lan
Exa
min
erC
orre
ctio
ns m
ade
retu
rns
to C
PB
Che
ck d
ata
ente
red
by 4
th F
loor
isco
rrec
t
Che
ck E
ngin
eer/A
rchi
tect
’slic
ense
num
ber s
tam
ped
on
all s
heet
sof
pla
ns
Writ
e P
erm
itA
pplic
atio
nnu
mbe
r at e
nd o
f pla
n sh
eets
Mis
sing
sta
mps
Send
s P
erm
it A
pplic
atio
nan
d pl
ans
to n
ext s
tatio
n on
Rou
ting
Slip
Che
ck a
ddre
ss o
rC
reat
e N
ewAd
dres
s
Add
ress
Pro
blem
Add
info
rmat
ion
onB
lock
and
lot M
ap
Dem
oliti
on N
otic
e: 2
set
sof
mai
ling
stic
kers
,af
fidav
it, 3
00' r
adiu
s m
ap,
mai
ling
list f
or fi
le
Insu
ffici
ent d
ocum
ents
FIN
ISH
Oth
er C
PB D
utie
s:A
nsw
er m
isce
llane
ous
ques
tions
Addr
ess
assi
gnm
ents
Pro
vide
plan
s un
der 1
5-da
yho
ld to
view
300'
Mai
l of p
rinci
pal p
ortio
n(D
BIp
olic
y)E
xpire
d pe
rmit
rene
wal
sE
xten
sion
of p
erm
its s
till u
nder
filin
gN
otic
e of
Perm
it C
ance
llatio
n/ L
ette
r of
Dis
appr
oval
Per
mit
with
draw
alM
aint
ain
list o
fnot
ifica
tions
Bilin
gual
tran
slat
ion
Cha
nge
owne
r/con
tract
orR
efun
dsM
eetin
gs, t
rain
ings
Lege
nd:A
UTO
MA
TIO
N C
OM
MEN
TAR
Yar
e in
Blu
e Ita
lic
Sep
tem
ber 4
, 200
7
BP
R –
Aut
omat
ion
Sub
com
mitt
ee A
s-Is
Map
ping
: C
entra
l Per
mit
Bur
eau
(CP
B) P
erm
it Is
suan
ce
STA
RT
Perm
it is
A
PPR
OVE
D o
nPT
S
Cen
tral P
erm
itB
urea
u16
60 M
issi
on S
t. 1st
Flo
or8:
00 A
M –
4:30
PM
558-
6070
Take
a n
umbe
rW
aitti
me
: 30
min
utes
~ 2
hou
rs(N
ot a
utom
ated
)
Per
son
mus
t be
liste
d on
the
perm
it or
the
Ow
ner.
If no
t, m
ust b
ring
Lette
r of A
utho
rizat
ion
fori
ssua
nce.
Cal
ls D
istr
ict
Insp
ecto
r to
Star
tW
ork
*Mus
twai
t 15
days
if D
EMO
LITI
ON
perm
it*
WO
RK
UN
DER
WA
Y
1408
Cle
rical
Sta
ffge
ts p
lans
from
tem
pora
ry s
tora
ge
Priv
ate
com
pany
to g
et li
stG
et a
ppro
val f
rom
GR
PC
an a
ppea
l at
Boar
d of
Per
mit
App
eals
ForD
emol
ition
, sen
d ou
t 300
'N
otifi
catio
n (N
eed
new
list i
f ove
r a
year
), ch
eck
appr
oval
of G
reen
Rec
ycle
Pro
gram
(GR
P)
List
is o
btai
ned
from
out
side
vend
or,n
ot li
nked
to G
IS/A
VSad
dres
ses
Oth
er a
genc
ies
to p
ay(N
ot a
utom
ated
)
Che
cks
to s
eepa
ymen
t of
mis
c. fe
es/a
genc
ies
and
ente
rs in
toPT
Ssu
ch a
sS
FUS
D, T
IDF,
etc
. …N
ot a
ll co
mpl
eten
ess
chec
ksar
e au
tom
ated
Ret
urns
to C
PB
No
list o
r nee
d up
date
d lis
tN
oap
prov
al fr
om G
RP
Che
ck S
tate
Con
tract
ors’
Lic
ense
,SF
Bus
ines
s Ta
x R
egis
tratio
n, a
nd W
orke
rsC
ompe
nsat
ion
(if n
eede
d) in
Con
tract
orIn
form
atio
n D
atab
ase
CIS
-Sem
i-aut
omat
ed, P
TS n
ot li
nked
to S
tate
dat
abas
e an
dTa
x sy
stem
s
Firs
t tim
e C
ontra
ctor
app
lyin
gW
ith n
o pr
oof o
f doc
umen
tatio
nor
Exp
ired
licen
ses/
insu
ranc
e
Sta
te C
ontra
ctor
’s L
icen
seB
oard
Not
link
ed/a
utom
ated
with
PTS
Mus
t ren
ew a
ndre
turn
with
pro
of
Insu
ranc
e
City
Hal
l Tax
Col
lect
or’s
Offi
ce8:
00 A
M –
5:00
PM
Not
link
ed/a
utom
ated
with
PTS
Per
mit
with
Con
tract
orU
ndec
lare
d
Returnto CPB with proper documents
Pay
men
t by
cash
, che
ck, V
isa
or M
aste
rCar
dEn
ter d
ata
into
PTS
.Pr
oces
s on
POS.
Prin
t Per
mit,
Fill
out J
obC
ard
with
app
licat
ion
num
ber a
ndex
pira
tion
date
. Atta
ch o
ther
info
rmat
ion
such
as
“Gen
eral
Info
rmat
ion
abou
tC
onst
ruct
ion
inSa
n Fr
anci
sco”
and
SF
Env
ironm
ent b
roch
ure
onC
onst
ruct
ion/
Dem
oliti
onW
aste
pro
cedu
res
(Man
ual
Proc
ess)
If pa
ying
by C
ompa
ny C
redi
tCar
d,M
ust h
ave
Com
pany
’s A
utho
rizat
ion
Lette
r
If no
t pai
d, A
pplic
ant m
ust g
o pa
y an
d re
turn
Ret
urns
to C
PB
Ver
ify p
lans
are
pro
perly
stam
ped
by v
ario
us a
genc
ies
(Man
ual P
roce
ss)
Sta
mp
“AP
PR
OV
ED
”on
each
shee
t(M
anua
l Pro
cess
)
Mis
sing
sta
mps
CP
B b
ack
room
sto
rage
to b
e m
icro
film
ed (P
icke
dup
by
PS
D S
taff)
Other stampedAnd signed set and
Permit to CPBback room
Issu
es p
erm
itin
PTS
,Jo
b ca
rd, a
nd g
ives
one
set
of p
lans
to c
usto
mer
Not
list
ed o
n pe
rmit.
No
Lette
r of A
utho
rizat
ion
Can
not i
ssue
per
mit
Non
Dem
oliti
on P
erm
it
Upd
ate
offic
ial B
lock
Map
inO
ffice
Not
dig
itize
d –
Man
ual
proc
ess
30" x
30"
post
er p
repa
red
by C
PB s
taff,
incl
udin
gpa
stin
g pe
rmit
prin
tont
osi
gn(M
anua
l Pro
cess
)
Oth
er C
PB D
utie
s:A
nsw
er m
isce
llane
ous
ques
tions
Add
ress
ass
ignm
ents
Pro
vide
pla
ns u
nder
15
day
hold
tovi
ew30
0' M
ailo
f prin
cipa
lpor
tion
(DBI
polic
y)E
xpire
d pe
rmit
rene
wal
sE
xten
sion
ofp
erm
its s
tillu
nder
filin
gN
otic
e of
Per
mit
Can
cella
tion
/ Le
tter o
f Dis
appr
oval
Per
mit
With
draw
alM
aint
ain
list o
f not
ifica
tions
Bili
ngua
l tra
nsla
tion
Cha
nge
owne
r/con
tract
orR
efun
dsM
eetin
gs, t
rain
ings
Lege
nd:A
UTO
MA
TIO
N C
OM
MEN
TAR
Y ar
e in
Blu
e Ita
lic
Sep
tem
ber 3
, 200
7
BP
R –
Aut
omat
ion
Sub
com
mitt
ee A
s-Is
Map
ping
: C
entra
l Per
mit
Bur
eau
(CP
B) B
ounc
ed C
heck
Flag
s on
Div
isio
n A
pplic
atio
ns–
Con
trac
tors
Info
rmat
ion
Syst
em –
no
othe
r per
mits
may
be
issu
ed to
this
appl
ican
t
Cen
tral P
erm
itB
urea
u16
60 M
issi
on S
treet
1st F
loor
Per
mit
Issu
edby
che
ck p
aym
ent
No
elec
tron
icch
eck
verif
icat
ion
Cal
led
to S
tart
Wor
k
WO
RK
UN
DER
WA
YN
otifi
es C
PB
abo
utbo
unce
d ch
eck
Sen
ds W
arni
ng L
ette
r10
cal
enda
rday
s to
cle
ar w
ith $
50 b
ank
serv
ice
fee
or c
ase
will
be
sent
to C
olle
ctio
n A
genc
y in
30 c
alen
dar d
ays
and
Per
mit
will
be
susp
ende
d if
alre
ady
issu
edor
flag
ged
DO
NO
T IS
SU
E an
d su
bjec
t to
canc
ella
tion
Nam
e on
che
ckPa
yee
No
Res
pons
e.P
erm
itsu
spen
ded
or c
ance
lled
App
lican
tret
urns
with
perm
it fe
ean
d ad
ditio
nal $
50 p
enal
ty fe
e P
aym
ent b
y m
oney
ord
er,
cash
ierc
heck
or c
ash
ON
LYIs
sue
reso
lved
. Upd
ated
on D
ivis
ion
App
licat
ions
.O
K fo
r ins
pect
ions
Che
ck b
ounc
es!
City
Hal
l Tax
Col
lect
or’s
Offi
ce
If C
ontra
ctor
,P
rofil
e w
ill be
flag
ged
onC
ontra
ctor
Info
rmat
ion
Scr
een
(CIS
)
Bui
ldin
g In
spec
tion
Div
isio
n16
60 M
issi
onS
treet
3rd F
loor
Plu
mbi
ng In
spec
tion
Div
isio
n16
60 M
issi
onS
treet
3rd F
loor
Notifies DistrictInspector(s).No inspection until issue is resolved
Ele
ctric
al In
spec
tion
Div
isio
n16
60 M
issi
onS
treet
3rd F
loor
CLEARED.OK for scheduling inspections
No
Res
pons
e. N
o In
spec
tions
.P
erm
it E
xpire
s
No
Res
pons
e. N
o In
spec
tions
.P
erm
it E
xpire
s
No
Res
pons
e. N
o In
spec
tions
.P
erm
it E
xpire
s
$
$
$
Pai
d fo
rFIL
ING
a su
bmitt
al p
erm
itan
d pl
an re
view
For N
onIs
sued
Per
mits
:Pa
y is
suan
ce fe
eIS
SU
ED
STA
RT
Lege
nd:A
UTO
MA
TIO
N C
OM
MEN
TAR
Y ar
e in
Blu
e Ita
lic
Sept
embe
r 4,2
007
BP
R –
Aut
omat
ion
Sub
com
mitt
ee A
s-Is
Map
ping
: E
lect
rical
/Plu
mbi
ng P
erm
its
STA
RT
Pro
perty
Ow
ners
ofN
on-S
ingl
e Fa
mily
Det
ache
dD
wel
lings
and/
or h
avin
ga
cont
ract
orw
ho w
ants
to
appl
y fo
r a p
erm
it
Cen
tral
Per
mit
Bur
eau
1660
Mis
sion
St,
1st F
loor
8:00
AM
–4:
30 P
M14
08 C
leric
alSt
aff
Cal
ls fo
r nex
t cus
tom
erC
heck
s in
form
atio
n on
DB
IC
ontra
ctor
s In
form
atio
n S
yste
mP
roce
sses
Per
mit
Obt
ains
fees
Issu
es P
erm
itU
se P
ID s
yste
m to
che
ck p
rope
rty
prof
ile in
form
atio
nC
heck
con
trac
tor b
usin
ess
licen
sean
d w
orke
rs c
ompe
nsat
ion
valid
ityC
heck
for c
ompl
aint
s/ac
tive
NO
V/pe
nalty
on a
ddre
ss –
Par
tially
auto
mat
edPe
rmit
issu
ed a
fter f
ee c
olle
ctio
n in
POS
Elec
tric
alIn
spec
tion
Div
isio
n16
60 M
issi
on S
t, 3rd
Flo
or
7:30
AM
–4:
00P
MC
lerk
and
Sr. E
lect
rical
Ins
pect
orFo
r hom
eow
ners
of S
FFD
, wor
k to
be
pref
orm
edby
ow
ner o
n tit
le.
For S
olar
per
mit
-IN
TER
IM p
roce
dure
,le
ave
appl
icat
ion
pack
age
and
paym
ent.
Cus
tom
er w
ill ge
t cal
l to
pick
uppe
rmit
or p
robl
ems.
Cle
rical
sup
port
(142
4, 1
426,
140
8)ch
eck
prop
erty
pro
file
for d
etac
hed
SFFD
and
occ
upan
cy o
f hom
eow
ner a
tpr
oper
tySp
eak
with
Insp
ecto
r (62
48) o
r Sr.
Insp
ecto
r (62
49) t
o ge
t an
appr
oval
.U
pon
appr
oval
,cle
rical
sup
port
will
proc
ess
the
perm
it.U
se E
ID s
yste
mto
chec
k pr
oper
typr
ofile
info
rmat
ion
Che
ckfo
r com
plai
nts/
activ
e N
OV/
pena
lty o
n ad
dres
s –
Part
ially
auto
mat
edIf
no c
ompl
aint
s/N
OV
on a
ddre
ss,
then
Per
mit
issu
ed a
fter f
eeco
llect
ion
in P
OS
Hom
eow
ners
of S
ingl
eFa
mily
Det
ache
dD
wel
lings
(Wor
k to
be
pref
orm
ed b
y ho
meo
wne
rs)
Spe
ak w
ithIn
spec
tor
$
$
$
Con
tract
or w
ith v
alid
spe
cial
ty li
cens
es re
cord
(Plu
mbi
ng: C
36,C
4, C
20,e
tc. a
nd E
lect
rical
:C10
, C7,
C11
, C20
, C45
, C46
, C53
, D28
, D34
)ob
tain
per
mit
in C
PB fo
r wor
k of
thei
r spe
cial
ty.
Lice
nsed
Con
tract
ors
with
pro
ofof
val
id C
ontra
ctor
s’ L
icen
se, W
orke
rs C
ompe
nsat
ion
and
SF
Bus
ines
s Ta
x Li
cens
e R
egis
tratio
n C
ertif
icat
e or
alre
ady
on D
BI C
ontra
ctor
s In
form
atio
n S
yste
m
Cus
tom
er S
ervi
ce
Fiel
d In
spec
tion
FIN
ISH
Onl
ine
Perm
itsht
tp://
ww
w.s
fgov
.org
Onl
ine
Ser
vice
s
If no
com
plai
nts/
NO
V th
enPe
rmit
issu
ed o
nlin
e af
ter f
eeco
llect
ion
usin
g on
line
e-co
mm
erce
sys
tem
Info
rmat
ion
on C
PB
dat
abas
e.R
egis
ters
Onl
ine
Rec
eive
sLo
g-in
/Pas
swor
dAp
plie
s O
nlin
e!
Any
exp
ired
licen
ses,
Wor
kers
Com
pens
atio
n,A
ctiv
e co
mpl
aint
s or
Not
ices
of V
iola
tion
on
prop
erty
Stat
e C
ontr
acto
rs’ L
icen
se B
oard
DB
I sys
tem
not
link
with
Stat
e sy
stem
Onl
y w
eekl
y up
date
of d
ata
City
Hal
lTa
x C
olle
ctor
s O
ffice
1 D
r.C
arlto
n G
oodl
ett P
lace
DB
I sys
tem
not
link
ed T
axC
olle
ctor
sys
tem
Wor
kers
Com
pens
atio
nD
BI s
yste
m n
ot li
nked
with
Stat
e sy
stem
DB
I BID
/EID
/PID
1660
Mis
sion
Stre
et 3
rd fl
oor
DB
I CES
1650
Mis
sion
Stre
et, R
m 3
12C
8:00
AM
–5:
00 P
MC
lerk
and
Sr.
Insp
ecto
rC
usto
mer
s si
gn in
on
clip
boar
d/ca
ll on
pho
nean
d w
ait t
o be
cal
led
(5-3
0 m
inut
es w
ait)
Req
uire
d if
ther
e ar
e an
y bu
ildin
g, e
lect
rical
,pl
umbi
ng, v
iola
tions
that
hav
e no
t bee
n ab
ated
App
lican
ts m
ust c
lear
any
rela
ted
viol
atio
nsbe
fore
with
per
mit
befo
re s
ubm
ittin
g an
y ot
her
perm
it ap
plic
atio
ns fo
r any
sco
pe o
f wor
k.D
BIw
ill a
bate
any
old
case
s th
at a
re n
ot re
late
dto
the
wor
k if
poss
ible
(Ex:
An
activ
e ca
se a
bout
a no
ise
com
plai
nt fr
om 1
996.
If D
BI a
ssur
es th
atno
ted
viol
atio
n is
no
long
er a
con
cern
, aS
r.In
spec
tor w
ill a
bate
the
case
)A
sses
s an
y ne
cess
ary
fees
(Sco
pe o
f wor
k2X
or 9
X)S
r.In
spec
tor S
tam
p/S
ign
if is
sue
is re
solv
edan
d/or
not
requ
ired
(issu
es n
ot re
late
d to
cur
rent
appl
icat
ion)
Perm
itis
sued
afte
r fee
col
lect
ion
in P
OS
Ele
ctric
al P
erm
itfo
r Con
tract
ors:
C10
, C45
, D28
, D34
Plu
mbi
ngP
erm
it fo
r Con
tract
ors:
C36
, C20
Upd
ate
Con
tract
orIn
form
atio
n
Plum
bing
Insp
ectio
n D
ivis
ion
1660
Mis
sion
St,
3rd F
loor
7:30
AM
–4:
00P
MC
lerk
and
Sr. I
nspe
ctor
For N
ew, R
enew
al o
r Am
endm
ent
perm
its d
one
by h
omeo
wne
rsFo
r Sho
wer
Pan
Per
mits
forB
Lic
ense
dC
ontra
ctor
s on
lyC
leric
al s
uppo
rt (1
424,
142
6, 1
408)
chec
kpr
oper
ty p
rofil
e fo
r det
ache
dSF
FD a
nd o
ccup
ancy
of h
omeo
wne
r at
prop
erty
Spea
k w
ith In
spec
tor (
6242
) or S
r.In
spec
tor (
6246
) to
get a
n ap
prov
al.
Upo
n ap
prov
al,c
leric
al s
uppo
rt w
illpr
oces
s th
e pe
rmit
Use
PID
sys
tem
toch
eck
prop
erty
prof
ile in
form
atio
nC
heck
cont
ract
or b
usin
ess
licen
sean
d w
orke
rs c
omp
valid
ityC
heck
for c
ompl
aint
s/ac
tive
NO
V/pe
nalty
on
addr
ess
– Pa
rtia
llyau
tom
ated
If no
com
plai
nts/
NO
Von
add
ress
,th
en P
erm
it is
sued
afte
r fee
colle
ctio
n in
PO
S
Spe
ak w
ithIn
spec
tor
Qua
lifie
d to
issu
e fo
r“O
wne
r’s P
erm
it”E
lect
rical
/ P
lum
bing
per
mits
issu
ed a
t 3rd
Floo
r Ele
ctric
al In
spec
tor
Cou
nter
upo
n ap
prov
al b
y in
spec
tor
Con
tract
or in
form
atio
n ex
pire
d in
DB
I dat
abas
e
Con
tract
orD
atab
ase
upda
ted
Lege
nd:A
UTO
MA
TIO
N C
OM
MEN
TAR
Y ar
e in
Blu
eIta
lic
Rej
ect.
Mus
t Hire
Lice
nsed
Con
tract
or
Unq
ualif
ied
Mus
t Hire
Lice
nsed
Con
tract
or
REJ
ECT
Unq
ualif
ied
Mus
t Hire
Lice
nsed
Con
tract
or
8:00
AM
–3:
45 P
MC
alls
out
num
ber f
or th
e ne
xt c
usto
mer
1408
Cle
rk, 6
331
Build
ing
Insp
ecto
rR
evie
w a
pplic
atio
n fo
rms
for
com
plet
enes
sC
heck
for D
BI v
iola
tions
, Pla
nnin
gH
isto
rical
sig
nific
ance
, Blo
ck a
nd L
otin
form
atio
n on
Div
isio
n A
pplic
atio
ns –
Per
mit
Trac
king
Sys
tem
Det
erm
ine
rout
ing
requ
irem
ents
Est
ablis
h fo
rm ty
pe (
Form
3 o
r For
m 8
)S
tam
p Le
ad F
ee if
requ
ired
Pro
vide
fina
l sta
mp/
sign
-off
afte
r all
requ
ired
disc
iplin
es h
ave
sign
edC
usto
mer
wai
t tim
e no
t tra
cked
8:00
AM
–5:
00P
MTa
ke a
num
ber (
5 –
60 m
in. w
ait)
Che
ck if
Pla
nnin
g D
epar
tmen
t app
rova
l is
nece
ssar
yVe
rify
prop
erty
info
on
Pla
nnin
g D
epar
tmen
t dat
abas
eIf
hist
oric
al,c
usto
mer
mus
t tal
k to
a h
isto
rical
pre
serv
atio
nist
–hi
stor
ical
pre
serv
atio
nist
s ar
e on
ly a
t the
cou
nter
2.5
hou
rspe
r day
Che
ck B
BN
,Pla
nnin
g vi
olat
ion,
½ fe
e, e
tc.
Verif
y ro
utin
gIf
OK
, sta
mp
with
fee
stam
p on
fron
t of p
erm
it ap
plic
atio
n fo
rm, s
ign
back
of a
pplic
atio
n fo
rmPl
anni
ng D
epar
tmen
t dat
abas
e is
not
tied
to D
BI’s
Gen
eral
per
mitt
ing
info
rmat
ion
is n
ot a
vaila
ble
on D
BIw
ebsi
teN
o pe
rform
ance
mea
sure
sin
pla
ceC
usto
mer
wai
t tim
eno
t tra
cked
DB
I Pub
licIn
form
atio
nC
ount
er (1
st F
loor
)
Sta
rt
New
Cus
tom
ers
or th
ose
that
may
be
unfa
milia
r w
ithth
e pr
oces
s
DB
IOTC
No
Pla
nsC
ount
er R
evie
w (1
st F
loor
Sta
tion
2)
DB
IC
entra
l Per
mit
Bure
au
Freq
uent
or E
xper
ienc
edC
usto
mer
sA
pplic
ant t
akes
a n
umbe
rC
usto
mer
wai
t tim
e no
t tra
cked
Pla
nnin
g D
epar
tmen
tIn
form
atio
n C
ount
er (P
IC)
(1st F
loor
Sta
tion
1)
DP
W-B
SM
(1st F
loor
, Sta
tion
4)S
FFD
Pla
n R
evie
w(4
th F
loor
)
DB
I Hou
sing
Insp
ectio
nS
ervi
ces
(6th F
loor
)
DB
I Mec
hani
cal P
lan
Rev
iew
(4th F
loor
)
DB
I B
ID/P
ID/E
ID (3
rd fl
oor)
orC
ES
(165
0 M
issi
on S
t. 3rd
floo
r,R
m. 3
12C
) dep
endi
ng o
nC
ompl
aint
Cas
e st
atus
SFR
A1
Sout
hV
an N
ess
DB
I Vio
latio
n no
t aba
ted
Dire
cts
cust
omer
s to
app
ropr
iate
sta
tions
– ta
ke a
num
ber a
t S
tatio
n2
and
wai
t14
24 C
lerk
, 142
6 S
enio
r Cle
rk, 1
840
Jr. M
anag
emen
tAss
ista
ntIf
scop
e of
wor
kne
eds
Pla
nnin
g D
epar
tmen
t rev
iew
, tel
lscu
stom
er to
take
a n
umbe
r at P
lann
ing
as w
ell i
f the
re is
a lo
ngw
ait
Dire
cts
cust
omer
s to
app
ropr
iate
app
licat
ion
form
sH
elps
cus
tom
ers
with
fillin
gou
t the
form
s
Scop
es o
fWor
ks a
t Sta
tion
2D
ry ro
t rep
air.
Term
ite re
port
is o
ptio
nal.
Mus
t ide
ntify
area
and
loca
tion
Re-
roof
ing
exce
pt c
ool r
oof
Win
dow
repl
acem
ent
Gar
age
door
repl
acem
ent (
sam
e si
ze)
Non
-Stru
ctur
al k
itche
n an
d ba
th re
mod
elR
epla
ce/re
pair
sidi
ng,s
tucc
oC
hang
ing
wal
ls (n
on-r
ated
) fro
mst
ucco
to s
idin
gor
vice
ver
sa(p
ictu
res
are
requ
ired
by P
lann
ing
Dep
artm
ent)
Inst
alla
tion
of a
ncho
r bol
ts a
nd p
lyw
ood
pane
ls o
n th
e gr
ound
floo
ror
resi
dent
ialb
uild
ings
Not
ice
of V
iola
tion
com
plia
nce
with
out p
lans
8:00
AM
–5:
00 P
MA
pplic
antu
ses
the
in-h
ouse
pho
ne a
nd c
alls
8-6
060
to b
e as
sist
edD
PW
-BS
M s
taff
com
es c
omes
from
beh
ind
the
wal
l (th
eir w
ork
cubi
cal)
to th
eP
erm
it St
atio
n 4
Rev
iew
s st
reet
spa
ce u
se is
nec
essa
ry(n
umbe
r of f
eet,
curb
cut
, stre
et b
lock
age,
etc.
)A
pply
for s
treet
spa
ce p
erm
it –
give
s ap
plic
ant a
noth
er fo
rm w
hich
they
nee
dto
fax
to D
PW-B
SM
on
875
Ste
vens
on S
treet
to a
ctiv
ate
Cus
tom
er w
ait t
ime
not t
rack
edG
ener
al p
erm
ittin
g in
form
atio
n is
not
ava
ilabl
e on
DB
I web
site
Dat
abas
e no
t lin
ked
to D
BI’s
8:00
AM
–5:
00 P
MS
ign
in o
n th
e cl
ipbo
ard
and
wai
t to
beca
lled
Rev
iew
app
licat
ion
for S
FFD
cod
e co
mpl
ianc
eS
tam
p/Si
gn a
pplic
atio
nC
ompl
ete
SFF
D in
spec
tion
form
IfO
K, s
tam
p w
ith fe
e st
amp
on fr
ont o
f pe
rmit
appl
icat
ion
form
, sig
n ba
ck o
f ap
plic
atio
n fo
rmC
usto
mer
wai
t tim
e no
t tra
cked
SFF
D’s
ass
embl
y an
d hi
gh ri
seda
taba
se is
not
dig
ital o
r lin
ked
to D
BI’s
data
base
Gen
eral
perm
ittin
g in
form
atio
n is
not
avai
labl
eon
DB
I web
site
8:00
AM
–5:
00 P
MD
rop
in w
ith 1
424,
142
6 cl
eric
al s
taff
Ver
ifica
tion
for 3
+ un
it bu
ildin
g(R
-1)
Che
ck fo
r act
ive
com
plai
nt c
ases
Res
olve
any
Hou
sing
rela
ted
viol
atio
nsS
r. H
ousi
ng In
spec
tor s
igns
app
licat
ion
and
any
refe
renc
edo
cum
ents
If O
K, s
tam
p w
ith fe
e st
amp
on fr
ont o
f per
mit
appl
icat
ion
form
,si
gn b
ack
of a
pplic
atio
n fo
rmC
usto
mer
wai
t tim
e no
t tra
cked
Gen
eral
per
mitt
ing
info
rmat
ion
is n
ot a
vaila
ble
on D
BI w
ebsi
te
If re
quire
d fo
r Mec
hani
cal r
evie
wSt
amp/
Sig
n ap
plic
atio
n52
03, 5
241,
520
5 M
echa
nica
lEn
gine
ers
If O
K, s
tam
p w
ith fe
e st
amp
on fr
ont
of p
erm
it ap
plic
atio
n fo
rm, s
ign
back
of a
pplic
atio
n fo
rmC
usto
mer
wai
t tim
eno
t tra
cked
Gen
eral
per
mitt
ing
info
rmat
ion
is n
ot
avai
labl
e on
DB
I web
site
If re
quire
d fo
r SFR
Are
view
Sta
mp/
Sig
n ap
plic
atio
nIf
OK,
sta
mp
with
fee
stam
p on
fron
t of p
erm
itap
plic
atio
n fo
rm,s
ign
back
of a
pplic
atio
n fo
rmO
ffice
is o
ffsite
No
auto
mat
ed w
ay o
fkn
owin
g if
a pr
ojec
t is
in a
re
deve
lopm
ent z
one
Cus
tom
erw
ait t
ime
not
track
edG
ener
al p
erm
ittin
gin
form
atio
n is
not
avai
labl
e on
DB
I web
site
8:00
AM
–5:
00 P
MC
lerk
and
Sr.
Bui
ldin
g In
spec
tor
Cus
tom
ers
sign
in o
n cl
ipbo
ard
and
wai
tto
be
calle
d (5
-30
min
utes
wai
t)C
usto
mer
mus
t cal
l ins
pect
or o
nte
leph
one
if no
cle
rkis
at t
he d
esk
Req
uire
d if
ther
e ar
e an
y bu
ildin
gel
ectri
cal,
plum
bing
, vio
latio
ns th
at h
ave
not b
een
abat
edA
pplic
ants
mus
t cle
ar a
ny re
late
dvi
olat
ions
bef
ore
with
perm
it be
fore
subm
ittin
g an
y ot
her p
erm
itap
plic
atio
nsfo
r any
sco
pe o
f wor
kD
BI w
illab
ate
any
old
case
s th
at a
re n
otre
late
d to
the
wor
k if
poss
ible
(Exa
mpl
e:A
n ac
tive
case
con
cern
ing
a no
ise
com
plai
nt fr
om 1
996.
If D
BI a
ssur
es th
atno
ted
viol
atio
n is
no
long
er a
con
cern
, a
Sr.
Bui
ldin
g In
spec
tor w
ill ab
ate
the
case
)A
cces
s an
y ne
cess
ary
fees
(Sco
pe o
fw
ork
x2 o
r x9)
Sr.
Bui
ldin
g In
spec
tor S
tam
p/S
ign
if is
sue
isre
solv
ed a
nd/o
r not
requ
ired
(issu
esno
t rel
ated
to c
urre
ntap
plic
atio
n)C
usto
mer
wai
t tim
e no
t tra
cked
Sept
embe
r 5 2
007
BP
R –
Aut
omat
ion
Sub
com
mitt
ee A
s-Is
Map
ping
: Ove
r-The
-Cou
nter
(OTC
) With
out P
lans
Ret
urn
to S
tatio
n 2
for s
ign
off
Nee
ds P
lann
ing
Dep
artm
ent R
evie
w
No Planning DepartmentReview
Next Station per Routing Slip
Ret
urn
to S
tatio
n2
for s
ign
off
Return to Station 2 for sign off
No
othe
r rev
iew
,Si
gn o
ff
Lege
nd:A
UTO
MA
TIO
N C
OM
MEN
TAR
Yar
e in
Blu
e Ita
licFi
nish
REJ
ECT
REJ
ECT
REJ
ECT
REJ
ECT
REJ
ECT
REJ
ECT
REJ
ECT
REJ
ECT
REJ
ECT
8:00
AM
–3:
45P
MC
alls
out
num
ber f
or th
e ne
xt c
usto
mer
.14
08C
lerk
, wai
t 10-
20 m
inut
esC
usto
mer
wai
t tim
eno
t tra
cked
8:00
AM
–5:
00 P
MTa
ke a
num
ber (
5 –
60 m
in. w
ait)
Che
ck if
Pla
nnin
g D
epar
tmen
tapp
rova
lis
nece
ssar
yV
erify
pro
perty
info
on
Pla
nnin
g D
epar
tmen
t dat
abas
eIf
hist
oric
al, c
usto
mer
mus
t tal
kto
a h
isto
rical
pres
erva
tioni
st –
his
toric
al p
rese
rvat
ioni
sts
are
only
at t
he
coun
ter 2
.5 h
ours
per
day
Che
ckB
BN
, Pla
nnin
g vi
olat
ion,
½ fe
e,et
c.V
erify
rout
ing
If O
K, s
tam
pw
ith fe
e st
amp
on fr
ont o
f per
mit
appl
icat
ion
form
, sig
nba
ck o
f app
licat
ion
form
Cus
tom
er w
ait t
ime
not t
rack
edP
lann
ing
Dep
artm
ent d
atab
ase
is n
ot ti
edto
DB
I’s
Sta
rt
New
Cus
tom
ers
or th
ose
that
may
be
unfa
milia
r w
ithth
e pr
oces
s.
DB
I Int
ake
Cou
nter
Sr.
Pla
nE
xam
iner
Sta
ff16
60 M
issi
onS
t4th
Flo
or
DB
IC
entra
l Per
mit
Bur
eau
Freq
uent
or E
xper
ienc
edC
usto
mer
sA
pplic
ant s
igns
in
Pla
nnin
g D
epar
tmen
tDep
artm
ent
Info
rmat
ion
Cou
nter
(PIC
)(1
st F
loor
Sta
tion
1)
DP
W –
BS
M
(1st F
loor
, Sta
tion
4)S
FFD
Pla
n R
evie
w(4
th F
loor
)
DB
I Hou
sing
Insp
ectio
nS
ervi
ces
(6th F
loor
)
DBI
Mec
hani
cal P
lan
Rev
iew
(4th F
loor
)
DB
I B
ID/P
ID/E
ID (3
rd fl
oor)
orC
ES
(165
0 M
issi
on S
t. 3rd
floo
r,R
m. 3
12C
) dep
endi
ng o
nC
ompl
aint
Cas
e st
atus
SFR
A1
Sou
th V
an N
ess
DB
I Vio
latio
n no
t aba
ted
Dire
cts
cust
omer
sto
appr
opria
test
atio
ns14
24 C
lerk
, 142
6 S
enio
r Cle
rk,1
840
Jr. M
anag
emen
t Ass
ista
ntIf
scop
e of
wor
k ne
eds
Pla
nnin
gD
epar
tmen
t Rev
iew
, tel
ls c
usto
mer
to
take
a n
umbe
rat P
lann
ing
Dep
artm
ent
asw
ell i
f the
reis
a lo
ng w
ait
Dire
cts
cust
omer
sto
appr
opria
teap
plic
atio
n fo
rms
Hel
ps c
usto
mer
s w
ith fi
lling
out
the
form
s
8:00
AM
–5:
00 P
MA
pplic
ant u
ses
the
in-h
ouse
pho
ne a
ndca
lls 8
-606
0 to
be
assi
sted
DP
W-B
SM s
taff
com
es c
omes
from
behi
nd th
e w
all (
thei
rwor
k cu
bica
l) to
the
Per
mit
Sta
tion
4R
evie
ws
stre
et s
pace
use
is n
eces
sary
(num
ber o
f fee
t, cu
rb c
ut, s
treet
bloc
kage
, etc
.)A
pply
for s
treet
spa
ce p
erm
it –
give
sap
plic
ant a
noth
erfo
rm w
hich
they
need
to fa
xto
DP
W-B
SM
on 8
75 S
teve
nson
Stre
et to
act
ivat
eC
usto
mer
wai
t tim
e no
t tra
cked
Dat
abas
e no
t lin
ked
to D
BI’s
8:00
AM
–5:
00 P
MS
ign
in o
n th
e cl
ipbo
ard
and
wai
tto
be
calle
dR
evie
w a
pplic
atio
n fo
r SFF
Dco
de c
ompl
ianc
eS
tam
p/S
ign
appl
icat
ion
Com
plet
e S
FFD
insp
ectio
n fo
rmIf
OK
, sta
mp
with
fee
stam
p on
front
of p
erm
it ap
plic
atio
n fo
rm,
sign
bac
k of
app
licat
ion
form
Cus
tom
er w
ait t
ime
not t
rack
edS
FFD
’sas
sem
bly
and
high
rise
data
base
is n
ot d
igita
l or l
inke
dto
DB
I’s d
atab
ase
8:00
AM
–5:
00 P
MD
rop
in w
ith 1
424,
142
6 cl
eric
alst
aff
Ver
ifica
tion
for3
+ un
it bu
ildin
g (R
-1)
Che
ck fo
r act
ive
com
plai
ntca
ses
Res
olve
any
hou
sing
rela
ted
viol
atio
nsS
r. H
ousi
ngIn
spec
tor s
igns
appl
icat
ion
and
any
refe
renc
edo
cum
ents
If O
K, s
tam
p w
ith fe
e st
amp
on fr
ont
of p
erm
it ap
plic
atio
n fo
rm, s
ign
back
of a
pplic
atio
nfo
rm
If re
quire
d fo
r Mec
hani
cal
revi
ewS
tam
p/S
ign
appl
icat
ion
5203
, 524
1. 5
205
Mec
hani
cal
Eng
inee
rsIf
OK
, sta
mp
with
fee
stam
p on
front
of p
erm
it ap
plic
atio
n fo
rm,
sign
bac
k of
app
licat
ion
form
If re
quire
d fo
r SFR
Are
view
Sta
mp/
Sig
n ap
plic
atio
nIf
OK,
sta
mp
with
fee
stam
p on
fron
t of p
erm
itap
plic
atio
n fo
rm, s
ign
back
of a
pplic
atio
nfo
rmO
ffice
is o
ffsite
Dat
abas
e no
t lin
ked
to
DB
I’sN
o au
tom
ated
way
of
know
ing
if a
proj
ect i
sin
a
rede
velo
pmen
t zon
e
8:00
AM
–5:
00 P
MC
lerk
and
Sr.
Bui
ldin
gIn
spec
tor
Cus
tom
ers
sign
in o
n cl
ipbo
ard
and
wai
t to
be c
alle
d(5
-30
min
utes
wai
t)C
usto
mer
mus
tcal
l ins
pect
oron
tele
phon
eif
no c
lerk
is a
tth
e de
skR
equi
red
ifth
ere
are
any
build
ing,
ele
ctric
al,p
lum
bing
,vi
olat
ions
that
hav
e no
t bee
nab
ated
App
lican
ts m
ust c
lear
any
rela
ted
viol
atio
ns b
efor
e w
ithpe
rmit
befo
re s
ubm
ittin
g an
y ot
her p
erm
it ap
plic
atio
ns fo
ran
y sc
ope
of w
ork
DB
I will
aba
te a
ny o
ld c
ases
th
at a
re n
ot re
late
d to
the
wor
kif
poss
ible
(Exa
mpl
e: A
n ac
tive
case
con
cern
ing
a no
ise
com
plai
nt fr
om 1
996.
If D
BI
assu
res
that
not
ed v
iola
tion
isno
long
er a
con
cern
, a S
r.B
uild
ing
Insp
ecto
r will
aba
teth
e ca
se)
Acc
ess
any
nece
ssar
y fe
es(S
cope
of w
ork
x2 o
r x9)
Sr.
Bui
ldin
g In
spec
tor S
tam
p/S
ign
if is
sue
isre
solv
ed a
nd/o
rno
t req
uire
d (is
sues
not
re
late
d to
cur
rent
app
licat
ion)
FIN
ISH
Sept
embe
r 5 2
007
BP
R –
Aut
omat
ion
Sub
com
mitt
ee A
s-Is
Map
ping
: Ove
r-The
-Cou
nter
(OTC
) with
Pla
ns
Ret
urn
to S
tatio
n 2
for s
ign
off
Nee
ds P
lann
ing
Dep
artm
ent R
evie
w
No Planning Department Review
Next Station per Routing Slip
Ret
urn
to S
tatio
n 2
for a
pplic
atio
n nu
mbe
r ass
ignm
ent
Return to Station 2 for sign off
No other review, Sign off
*App
licat
ion
reje
cted
by
the
stat
ion,
pen
ding
addi
tiona
l inf
orm
atio
nre
quire
d or
due
to n
on-
code
com
plyi
ngap
plic
atio
n
INTA
KE
CE
NTE
R“T
riage
”16
60 M
issi
onS
t.4th
Flo
or
8:00
AM
–3:
45 P
MR
evie
w a
pplic
atio
n fo
rms
for
com
plet
enes
sC
heck
for D
BI v
iola
tions
,Pla
nnin
gD
epar
tmen
t His
toric
al s
igni
fican
ce, B
lock
and
Lot i
nfor
mat
ion
on D
ivis
ion
Appl
icat
ions
– P
TSD
eter
min
e ro
utin
g re
quire
men
tsEs
tabl
ish
form
type
( Fo
rm 3
or 8
)St
amp
Lead
Fee
if re
quire
dPr
ovid
e fin
al s
tam
p/si
gn-o
ff af
ter a
llre
quire
d di
scip
lines
hav
e si
gned
Cus
tom
er w
ait t
ime
not t
rack
edPr
oper
ty in
form
atio
n is
man
ually
ente
red
into
PTS
. No
way
ofv
erify
ing
data
DB
I Pla
n R
evie
w S
ervi
ces
(4th F
loor
)
8:00
AM
–5:
00P
MS
ign
in o
n th
e cl
ipbo
ard
and
wai
t to
be c
alle
dR
evie
w a
pplic
atio
nfo
r Bui
ldin
g co
deco
mpl
ianc
eS
tam
p/S
ign
appl
icat
ion
Com
plet
e SF
FD in
spec
tion
form
If O
K, s
tam
p w
ith fe
e st
amp
on fr
ont
of p
erm
it ap
plic
atio
n fo
rm, s
ign
back
of a
pplic
atio
n fo
rm.
Cus
tom
er w
ait t
ime
not t
rack
ed
Cha
nges
that
trig
gers
Plan
ning
Dep
artm
ent
revi
ew
Cha
nges
that
trig
gers
Plan
ning
Dep
artm
ent
revi
ew
Cha
nges
that
trig
gers
Plan
ning
Dep
artm
ent
revi
ew
Cha
nges
that
trig
gers
Plan
ning
Dep
artm
ent
revi
ew
Cha
nges
that
trig
gers
Plan
ning
Dep
artm
ent
revi
ew
Cha
nges
that
trig
gers
Plan
ning
Dep
artm
ent
revi
ew
Pla
nnin
g D
epar
tmen
t/Cle
rk16
50 M
issi
onS
t., 4
th F
loor
DBI
/Inta
ke c
alla
pplic
ant t
ore
turn
Can
not O
TC
App
lican
t brin
gs b
ack
and
finis
h pe
rrou
ting
slip
Applicant brings it to Planner
DB
I IN
FOR
MA
TIO
N C
OU
NTE
R
Lege
nd:A
UTO
MA
TIO
N C
OM
MEN
TAR
Y ar
e in
Blu
e Ita
lic
8:00
AM
–3:
45 P
MC
usto
mer
sig
ns in
Sr.
Pla
n E
xam
iner
che
cks
for
com
plet
enes
sM
ayco
nsul
t with
SFF
D, g
reat
erde
gree
of r
evie
w if
not
a s
ite p
erm
itD
evel
ops
Rou
ting
on C
ompu
ter
Pro
perty
info
rmat
ion
is m
anua
llyen
tere
d in
to P
TS. N
o w
ayof
verif
ying
dat
aC
usto
mer
wai
t tim
e no
t tra
cked
8:00
AM
–5:
00 P
MTa
ke a
num
ber (
5 –
60 m
in. w
ait)
Che
ck e
ntitl
emen
tsV
erify
pro
perty
info
on P
lann
ing
Dep
artm
ent d
atab
ase
If hi
stor
ical
, cus
tom
er m
ust t
alk
to a
hist
oric
al p
rese
rvat
ioni
st–
hist
oric
alpr
eser
vatio
nist
s ar
e on
ly a
t the
coun
ter2
.5 h
ours
per
day
Che
ck B
BN
, Pla
nnin
g vi
olat
ion,
½ fe
e,et
c.Id
entif
y P
lann
er fo
rrou
ting
If ok
, ini
tial A
CC
EP
T on
rout
ing
slip
Cus
tom
er w
ait t
ime
not t
rack
edP
lann
ing
Dep
artm
ent d
atab
ase
is n
ottie
d to
DB
I’sG
ener
al p
erm
ittin
g in
form
atio
n is
not
avai
labl
e on
DB
I web
site
STA
RT
DB
I Int
ake
Cou
nter
1660
Mis
sion
St.
4th F
loor
Freq
uent
or E
xper
ienc
edC
usto
mer
s w
ith F
orm
3/8
atta
ched
with
Pre
-App
licat
ion
Lette
r,ot
her p
erm
it ap
prov
al c
ondi
tions
and
tree
disc
losu
re S
tate
men
t with
2 se
ts o
f pla
ns.
Pla
nnin
g D
epar
tmen
tInf
orm
atio
nC
ount
er (P
IC)
(1St
.Fl
oor S
tatio
n 1)
DP
W -
BSM
(1S
t.Fl
oor,
Stat
ion
4)
Sept
embe
r 5,2
007
BPR
-A
utom
atio
n S
ubco
mm
ittee
As-
Is M
appi
ng: R
esid
entia
l Add
ition
– S
ite P
erm
it
Vol
unta
ryP
re A
pplic
atio
n P
hase
Man
dato
ry P
lann
ing
Dep
artm
ent
Pre
App
licat
ion
– N
eigh
borh
ood
Not
ifica
tion
Mee
ting
(Pol
icy,
not
Cod
e)
Pla
nnin
g D
epar
tmen
t16
50 M
issi
on S
t.4th
Flo
or
DB
I16
60 M
issi
on S
t.2nd
Flo
or
8:00
AM
–5:
00 P
MS
ubm
it ap
plic
atio
nfo
rmw
ith $
710
fee
Inta
ke b
y cl
erk,
giv
ento
qua
dran
t2
wee
k w
ait f
orap
poin
tmen
t for
an
advi
sory
mee
ting
Not
hing
is w
ritte
n, b
utth
eyca
n re
ques
t for
a
writ
ten
lette
r of
dete
rmin
atio
n fro
mth
eZo
ning
Adm
inis
trato
rIf
not s
atis
fied,
have
the
Zoni
ngA
dmin
istra
tor t
o w
rite
a le
tter a
nd th
e le
tter c
an
be a
ppea
led
thro
ugh
Boa
rd o
f App
eals
8:00
AM
–5:
00 P
MS
ubm
it le
tter w
ith fe
eIn
clud
es S
FFD
,B
uild
ing
Eng
inee
ring/
Mec
hani
cal,
etc.
Pla
n R
evie
w S
ervi
ces
(PR
S) S
taff
revi
ews
and
deci
des
who
shou
ld a
ttend
(DB
I,P
lann
ing
Dep
artm
ent,
SFF
D)
Pre
-App
licat
ion
team
lead
er48
hour
s to
arr
ange
mee
ting
10da
ys to
con
duct
mee
ting
Acc
ept f
ees
for
agen
cies
Lette
r of D
eter
min
atio
ndr
afte
d w
ithin
2 w
eeks
Lette
r may
be
appe
aled
thro
ugh
the
chai
n of
com
man
d to
D
irect
or
8:00
AM
–5:
00 P
MC
all 8
-606
0 fro
m h
ouse
pho
neR
evie
w fo
r com
plet
enes
sId
entif
y ot
her p
erm
its re
quire
dD
atab
ase
not l
inke
d to
DB
I’sG
ener
al p
erm
ittin
g in
form
atio
n is
not
avai
labl
e on
DB
I web
site
Cus
tom
er w
ait t
ime
not t
rack
ed
DB
I Cen
tral P
erm
it B
urea
u(1
St.Fl
oor)
8:00
AM
–4:
30 P
MTa
ke a
num
ber a
nd w
ait
Cus
tom
er p
ays
plan
che
ck fe
esP
uts
in b
in fo
r Pla
nnin
g D
epar
tmen
tpi
ck u
pC
usto
mer
wai
ttim
e no
t tra
cked
Pla
nnin
g D
epar
tmen
t16
50 M
issi
on S
t.S
uite
400
Pla
nnin
g D
epar
tmen
t Cle
rk p
icks
up
plan
s ev
ery
day
CP
B lo
gs o
ut o
n P
TSP
lann
ing
Dep
artm
ent l
ogs
in o
n P
TSR
oute
to Q
uadr
ant T
eam
Lea
der w
ho a
lread
y ap
prov
edfro
m d
iscr
etio
nary
revi
ew/e
nviro
nmen
tal (
all b
efor
e su
bmitt
ing
to D
BI)
Add
s C
PZO
Con
rout
ing
for i
nclu
sion
ary
hous
ing
perm
its
8:00
AM
–5:
00P
M2-
3+ w
eeks
for a
ssig
nmen
t to
Pla
nner
, by
case
load
Rev
iew
by
Pla
nner
with
in 6
0 da
ys –
pro
ject
docu
men
tsco
mpl
ete,
add
ition
al m
ater
ials
orco
rrec
tions
to b
e su
bmitt
ed w
ithin
30
days
to p
lann
erPr
ojec
t gen
eral
ly“a
ppro
vabl
e”Pl
anne
r cal
lsap
plic
ant t
hat 3
11 N
otifi
catio
n is
read
yto
be
mai
led
Dis
cret
iona
ryR
evie
w a
nd o
ther
dis
cret
iona
ry a
ctio
ns(2
0%+/
-) ta
ke lo
nger
Min
imum
4-5
mon
ths
revi
ew –
if D
R –
long
erEn
viro
nmen
tal d
eter
min
atio
n m
ay b
e ap
peal
ed to
Boar
d of
Sup
ervi
sor
Sign
sN
o pe
rform
ance
mea
sure
s in
pla
cePl
anni
ng D
epar
tmen
t dat
abas
e is
not
tied
to D
BI’s
Gen
eral
per
mitt
ing
info
rmat
ion
is n
ot a
vaila
ble
on D
BI
web
site
DB
I Pla
n R
evie
w S
ervi
ces
1660
Mis
sion
St.
2nd F
loor
Cle
rkde
liver
s to
DB
I
8:00
AM
–5:
00 P
MC
hief
Cle
rk g
ets
2 se
ts o
f Sta
mpe
dpl
ans
and
othe
rdo
cum
ents
Logs
inon
PTS
on
arriv
al d
ate
Put
s in
bac
k va
ult
Wor
kloa
d M
anag
er d
eter
min
es n
umbe
r of
hou
rs fo
rre
view
Det
erm
ines
nex
t ava
ilabl
e P
lan
Exa
min
er w
ith th
e le
ast
back
log
and
verif
ies
rout
ing
(usu
ally
2 w
eeks
)C
urso
ryre
view
(not
det
aile
d pl
ans)
If ok
ay, S
tam
ps a
nd s
igns
Cal
lsap
plic
ant t
o su
bmit
addi
tiona
l set
s of
pla
ns p
er ro
utin
g
Cen
tral P
erm
it B
urea
u16
60 M
issi
onS
t., 1
St.
Floo
r
Site
Per
mit
Issu
edw
ith n
o A
dden
dum
Sche
dule
$
$
$
Beg
inA
dden
dum
Subm
ittal
15 C
alen
dar D
ayA
ppea
l Per
iod
(If n
ot p
ursu
ant t
o C
ondi
tiona
l Use
)
Pla
nnin
g D
epar
tmen
tC
ode
Vio
latio
n A
bate
men
t
Applicant returns withadditional sets
YIE
LD App
lican
t may
chos
e to
wai
tfor
Add
endu
m to
be
app
rove
dbe
fore
issu
ing
the
Site
Per
mit
Inco
mpl
ete
Mus
t ret
urn
Inco
mpl
ete
Mus
t ret
urn
Inco
mpl
ete
Mus
t ret
urn
SFF
D16
60 M
issi
onS
t.,2nd
Flo
or
Lege
nd:A
UTO
MA
TIO
N C
OM
MEN
TAR
Y ar
e in
Blu
e Ita
lic
8:00
AM
–3:
45 P
MC
usto
mer
sig
ns in
Sr.
Pla
n E
xam
iner
che
cks
for
com
plet
enes
s ba
sed
on w
hat y
our
subm
ittal
nee
ds –
nec
essa
rydo
cum
ents
, ref
eren
ce d
raw
ings
, cop
yof
Site
Per
mit
Pac
kage
for E
ACH
adde
ndum
with
num
ber o
f set
s fo
rnu
mbe
r of
sta
tions
Atta
ches
Add
endu
m c
ard
Ver
ifies
cor
rect
rout
ing
Sta
mps
and
logs
into
PTS
App
lican
t sig
ns a
dden
daca
rdIf
appl
ican
t brin
gs le
ss s
ets
than
the
num
ber
of s
tatio
ns, t
hey
can
brin
g it
late
rC
usto
mer
wai
t tim
e no
t tra
cked
8:00
AM
–5:
00 P
MTa
ke a
num
ber (
5 –
60 m
in. w
ait)
Che
ck e
ntitl
emen
tsV
erify
pro
perty
info
on
Pla
nnin
gD
epar
tmen
t dat
abas
e.If
hist
oric
al, c
usto
mer
mus
t tal
k to
a
hist
oric
al p
rese
rvat
ioni
st –
his
toric
alpr
eser
vatio
nist
sar
e on
ly a
t the
cou
nter
2.5
hour
s pe
r day
Che
ck B
BN
,Pla
nnin
g vi
olat
ion,
½ fe
e,
etc.
Iden
tify
Plan
ner f
or ro
utin
gIf
ok, i
nitia
l AC
CEP
Ton
rout
ing
slip
Cus
tom
er w
ait t
ime
not t
rack
edG
ener
al p
erm
ittin
g in
form
atio
n is
not
ava
ilabl
eon
DB
I web
site
Juni
or S
itePe
rmit
Issu
ed
DB
I Int
ake
Cou
nter
1660
Mis
sion
St
4th F
loor
App
lican
t ret
urns
with
min
imum
2se
ts o
f pla
ns w
ith c
lear
ly m
arke
dco
ver s
heet
say
ing
wha
t the
yar
e su
bmitt
ing
for
Pla
nnin
g D
epar
tmen
tIn
form
atio
n C
ount
er (P
IC)
(1st F
loor
Sta
tion
num
ber 1
)
Sept
embe
r 5, 2
007
BPR
-A
utom
atio
n S
ubco
mm
ittee
As-
Is M
appi
ng: R
esid
entia
l Add
ition
-A
dden
dum
If there are changes to the Site Permit that impactPlanning Department, must be routed to Planning Department
DB
I Pla
nR
evie
w S
ervi
ces
1660
Mis
sion
St
2nd F
loor
Inte
rnal
Rou
ting
No
Cha
nges
to S
ite
8:00
AM
–4:
45 P
MA
rriv
es in
bac
kva
ult
Wor
kloa
dM
anag
er d
eter
min
es n
umbe
r of h
ours
for
revi
ewD
eter
min
es n
ext a
vaila
ble
Plan
Exa
min
erw
ith th
ele
ast b
ack
log
Ver
ifies
rout
ing
If ad
ditio
nal s
ets
are
need
ed,
Cal
lsap
plic
ant t
o su
bmit
per r
outin
g
DB
I Stru
ctur
al P
lan
Rev
iew
1660
Mis
sion
St.,
2nd
Flo
or
RE
CH
EC
K A
PP
OIN
TME
NT
Rec
heck
app
oint
men
t is
mad
e w
ithth
e st
aff
App
lican
t and
Pla
n E
xam
iner
mee
t and
go
over
pla
ns to
geth
erIf
okay
, Pla
n E
xam
iner
sta
mps
and
sig
ns o
ffIf
mor
e ch
ange
sne
edto
be
mad
e, A
pplic
ant m
ust m
ake
chan
ges,
and
resc
hedu
lean
appo
intm
ent t
o m
eeta
gain
If there aremajor changes,MUSTsubmit alternative Site Permit
DB
I Pla
n R
evie
w S
ervi
ces
staf
f ver
ifies
all
need
ed s
tam
psfro
m o
ther
div
isio
ns a
nd d
epar
tmen
ts
WO
RK
UN
DE
RW
AY
DB
IPla
n R
evie
w S
ervi
ces
1660
Mis
sion
St.,
2nd
Flo
or
App
lican
t ret
urns
with
add
ition
al s
ets
No
resp
onse
Upo
n ex
pira
tion
date
,ap
plic
ant i
s se
nt a
w
arni
ng le
tter.
Ove
r the
Cou
nter
(See
OTC
with
Pla
ns M
ap)
If O
TCS
eria
lR
evie
w
Cancelled by CPB uponrequest of Plan Examiner
Exp
ires
in …
(fro
m h
old
date
):$1
~ $
99,9
99 –
39 C
alen
darD
ays
$100
K ~
$1
Mill
ion
–69
Cal
enda
rD
ays
$1 M
illio
n+ -
99 C
alen
dar D
ays
No
auto
mat
ed s
yste
m to
trac
k ex
pira
tion
Pays
Ext
ensi
on F
ee o
f $32
.80
with
DB
I Pla
n R
evie
w S
ervi
ces
on 2
nd F
loor
SFF
D16
60 M
issi
on S
t.,2nd
Flo
orD
BI S
truct
ural
Pla
n R
evie
w16
60 M
issi
on S
t., 2
nd F
loor
DP
W-B
SM
1660
Mis
sion
St,
1st F
loor
DP
H13
90 M
arke
tSt
Rev
iew
s, s
ends
out
plan
che
ck c
omm
ents
if ne
eded
to a
pplic
ant,
desi
gn p
rofe
ssio
nal
and
a co
urte
syfa
x to
pl
an ru
nner
App
lican
t mak
esR
eche
ck a
ppoi
ntm
ent
with
Pla
n Ex
amin
er
Pick
s up
dai
lyfro
m 2
nd fl
oor b
inLo
gs in
to P
TSR
evie
ws
for s
treet
/sid
ewal
k ge
nera
liss
ues
Appl
ican
t goe
s on
sep
arat
eap
plic
atio
n w
ith D
PW
-BU
F an
d D
PW
-BS
M if
ther
e is
tree
and
land
scap
eTu
rnar
ound
tim
e 5
Busi
ness
Day
sTe
lls a
pplic
ant b
efor
ehan
dto
file
a fu
ll se
t to
875
Ste
vens
on S
t. of
fice,
who
will
em
ailt
hein
form
atio
n ba
ck to
Sta
tion
num
ber 4
DP
W-B
SM
staf
f.G
ener
al p
erm
ittin
g in
form
atio
n is
not
ava
ilabl
e on
D
BI w
ebsi
te
Pic
ks u
p fro
m S
FFD
bin
Ass
igne
d M
on.a
nd T
ues.
mor
ning
Ass
ign
on P
TSac
cord
ing
to
back
log
Turn
arou
nd ti
me
3-4
wee
ksfo
r Hig
h R
ise
Put
into
Pla
n E
xam
iner
’sbi
n(P
re a
pplic
atio
n co
vers
wat
er fl
owca
lcul
atio
ns,
prel
imin
ary
Smok
e co
ntro
l)S
FFD
’sas
sem
bly
and
high
rise
data
base
is n
ot d
igita
lor
linke
d to
DB
I’s d
atab
ase
Gen
eral
per
mitt
ing
info
rmat
ion
is n
ot a
vaila
ble
on D
BI w
ebsi
te
Offi
ce is
offs
iteG
ener
al p
erm
ittin
gin
form
atio
n is
not
avai
labl
e on
DB
Iw
ebsi
te
SFR
A1
Sou
th V
an N
ess,
5th fl
oor
Wis
hes
to b
e la
st fo
r rev
iew
/ap
prov
al o
n si
te p
erm
it on
lyfo
rce
rtain
jobs
No
auto
mat
ed w
ayof
kno
win
g if
a pr
ojec
t is
ina
SFR
Azo
neO
ffice
is o
ffsite
Gen
eral
per
mitt
ing
info
rmat
ion
isno
t ava
ilabl
eon
DB
I web
site
May
or’s
Offi
ce O
nD
isab
ility
401
Van
Nes
s, R
m 3
00
All
perm
its u
sing
any
publ
ic fu
nds
are
hand
carr
ied
to M
OD
for
revi
ewO
ffice
isof
fsite
Gen
eral
perm
ittin
gin
form
atio
n is
not a
vaila
ble
onD
BI w
ebsi
te
App
lican
tcom
pile
s al
l wor
king
stam
ped
sets
into
2 s
ets
of fi
nal p
lans
Put
sal
l rec
heck
cha
nges
shee
ts to
geth
er
DBI
Mec
hani
cal P
lan
Rev
iew
1660
Mis
sion
St.,
2nd
Flo
or
DP
W-B
SM
1660
Mis
sion
St,
1st
Floo
r
SFF
D16
60 M
issi
on S
t., 2
nd
Floo
r
DB
I Mec
hani
cal P
lan
Rev
iew
1660
Mis
sion
St.,
2nd
Flo
or
Rev
iew
s fo
r M
echa
nica
lC
ode
Com
plia
nce
Para
llel R
evie
ww
ith M
ultip
le S
ets
of P
lans
and
copi
es o
f per
mit
appl
icat
ion
Rou
ted
to a
ppro
pria
te s
tatio
ns
Sign
Off
Part
ies
It is
then
the
appl
ican
t'sre
spon
sibi
lity
to c
onta
ct th
e in
divi
dual
dep
artm
ents
for f
inal
sign
off
mee
tings
, onc
e al
lof
the
plan
che
ck c
omm
ents
hav
e be
en a
ddre
ssed
Put
all
rech
eck
chan
ges
shee
tsto
DB
I Pla
n R
evie
wS
ervi
ces
DB
I Cen
tralP
erm
it B
urea
u16
60 M
issi
on S
t, 1st
Flo
or
No
Res
pons
e
Recheck Appointment
Applicant brings additional sets and copies of permit application
Responsible fordistribution
Inco
mpl
ete.
Fax
Com
men
tsto
App
lican
t. A
pplic
ant s
ubm
its o
n 2nd
floo
r *M
akes
sur
e th
e ch
ange
s do
esno
t con
flict
with
oth
er a
genc
ies
DP
W-B
SM
875
Ste
vens
onD
PW-B
UF
Cal
l 641
-264
6
Rec
heck
App
oint
men
t
Rev
ised
pla
n ro
uted
inte
rnal
ly
Offi
ce is
offs
iteG
ener
al p
erm
ittin
gin
form
atio
n is
not
avai
labl
e on
DB
Iw
ebsi
te
Lege
nd:A
UTO
MA
TIO
N C
OM
MEN
TAR
Y ar
e in
Blu
e Ita
lic
8:00
AM
–3:
45 P
MC
usto
mer
sig
ns in
Sr.
Pla
n E
xam
iner
che
cks
for c
ompl
eten
ess
Dev
elop
s R
outin
gon
Com
pute
rP
rope
rty in
form
atio
n is
man
ually
ent
ered
into
PTS
.N
o w
ayof
ver
ifyin
g da
taC
usto
mer
wai
t tim
e no
ttra
cked
8:00
AM
–5:
00 P
MTa
ke a
num
ber (
5 –
60 m
in.w
ait)
Che
ck e
ntitl
emen
tsV
erify
pro
perty
info
on P
lann
ing
Dep
artm
entd
atab
ase
If hi
stor
ical
, cus
tom
er m
ust t
alk
to a
his
toric
al p
rese
rvat
ioni
st –
hist
oric
al p
rese
rvat
ioni
sts
are
only
at th
e co
unte
r 2.5
hou
rs p
erda
yC
heck
BB
N, P
lann
ing
viol
atio
n, ½
fee,
etc
.Id
entif
y P
lann
er fo
rrou
ting
If ok
, ini
tial A
CC
EP
T on
rout
ing
slip
Cus
tom
er w
ait t
ime
not t
rack
edP
lann
ing
Dep
artm
ent d
atab
ase
isno
t tie
d to
DB
I’sG
ener
al p
erm
ittin
g in
form
atio
nis
not
ava
ilabl
e on
DB
I web
site
STA
RT
DB
I Int
ake
Cou
nter
1660
Mis
sion
St
4th F
loor
Freq
uent
or E
xper
ienc
ed C
usto
mer
s w
ith P
erm
it Fo
rm a
ttach
ed w
ith P
re-A
pplic
atio
n.Le
tter,
othe
r per
mit
appr
oval
con
ditio
ns a
nd tr
ee d
iscl
osur
e st
atem
ent w
ithtw
o se
ts o
f Site
Per
mit
Pla
ns
Pla
nnin
g D
epar
tmen
tIn
form
atio
n C
ount
er(P
IC)
(1st
Floo
r Sta
tion
1)
DP
W –
BS
M
(1st F
loor
, Sta
tion
4)
SFF
D(4
th F
loor
)
Sep
tem
ber 5
, 200
7
BP
R -
Aut
omat
ion
Sub
com
mitt
ee A
s-Is
Map
ping
: Res
iden
tial D
emol
ition
/New
Con
stru
ctio
n –
Site
Per
mit
Vol
unta
ryP
re A
pplic
atio
n P
hase
Pla
nnin
g D
epar
tmen
t16
50 M
issi
on S
t.4th
Flo
or
DB
I16
60 M
issi
onS
t2nd
Flo
or
8:00
AM
–5:
00 P
MS
ubm
it ap
plic
atio
nfo
rmw
ith $
710
fee
Inta
ke b
y cl
erk,
give
n to
qu
adra
nt; s
ched
ule
appo
intm
ent (
incl
udes
envi
ronm
enta
l and
his
toric
alre
view
)Tw
o-w
eek
wai
t for
appo
intm
ent f
or a
n ad
viso
rym
eetin
gN
othi
ng is
writ
ten,
but
they
ca
n re
ques
t for
a w
ritte
nle
tter o
f det
erm
inat
ion
from
the
Zoni
ng A
dmin
istra
tor
If no
t sat
isfie
d, h
ave
the
Zoni
ng A
dmin
istra
tor t
o w
rite
a le
tter a
nd th
e le
tter
can
be a
ppea
led
thro
ugh
Boa
rd o
f App
eals
8:00
AM
–5:
00 P
MS
ubm
it le
tter w
ith fe
eIn
clud
es S
FFD
,Bui
ldin
gE
ngin
eerin
g/M
echa
nica
l,et
c.P
lan
Rev
iew
Ser
vice
sst
affr
evie
ws
and
deci
des
who
sho
uld
atte
nd (D
BI,
Pla
nnin
g D
epar
tmen
t,S
FFD
)P
re A
pplic
atio
n te
amle
ader
48ho
urs
to a
rran
gem
eetin
gTe
n da
ys to
con
duct
mee
ting
Acc
eptf
ees
for a
genc
ies
Lette
r of D
eter
min
atio
ndr
afte
d w
ithin
2 w
eeks
Lette
r may
be
appe
aled
thro
ugh
the
chai
n of
com
man
d to
Dire
ctor
8:00
AM
–5:
00 P
MC
all 8
-606
0 fro
mho
use
phon
eR
evie
w fo
rcom
plet
enes
sId
entif
y ot
her p
erm
its re
quire
dD
atab
ase
not l
inke
d to
DB
I’sG
ener
al p
erm
ittin
g in
form
atio
nis
not
avai
labl
eon
DB
I web
site
Cus
tom
er w
aitt
ime
not t
rack
ed
DB
I Cen
tral P
erm
it Bu
reau
(1st F
loor
)
8:00
AM
–4:
30 P
MTa
kea
num
ber a
ndw
ait
Cus
tom
er p
ays
plan
chec
k fe
esP
uts
in b
in fo
rP
lann
ing
Dep
artm
ent
pick
up
Cus
tom
er w
ait t
ime
not t
rack
edPlan
ning
Dep
artm
ent
1650
Mis
sion
St.
Sui
te 4
00
8:00
AM
–5:
00P
MR
evie
w b
y P
lann
erVe
rifie
s th
atco
nditi
ons
of
appr
oval
are
sho
wn
on p
lans
No
perfo
rman
cem
easu
res
in p
lace
.G
ener
al p
erm
ittin
gin
form
atio
n is
not
avai
labl
e on
DB
Iw
ebsi
te
DB
IPla
n R
evie
w S
ervi
ces
1660
Mis
sion
St.
2nd F
loor
Cle
rk d
eliv
ers
to D
BI
8:00
AM
–5:
00 P
MC
hief
Cle
rk g
ets
2 se
ts o
f sta
mpe
dpl
ans
and
othe
rdo
cum
ents
Logs
in o
n PT
Son
arri
val d
ate
Put
s in
back
vau
ltW
orkl
oad
Man
ager
det
erm
ines
num
ber o
f hou
rs fo
r rev
iew
(for s
ite H
igh
Ris
e –
4 hr
s)D
eter
min
es n
ext a
vaila
ble
Pla
n E
xam
iner
with
the
leas
tba
ck lo
gV
erifi
es ro
utin
g
Cal
ls a
pplic
ant t
o su
bmit
add
ition
al s
ets
of p
lans
per r
outin
g
SFP
UC
1660
Mis
sion
St.,
1st F
loor
Pic
ks u
p fro
mbi
nFe
es a
ssig
ned
Gen
eral
per
mitt
ing
info
rmat
ion
is n
otav
aila
ble
on D
BI w
ebsi
te
CP
B16
60 M
issi
on S
t.,1st
Flo
or
For i
nclu
sion
ary
hous
ing
Offi
ce is
offs
ite8:
00 A
M –
4:30
PM
Cal
cula
te fi
nal f
ees
Cal
cula
te S
choo
l Fee
s, C
al-O
SH
A, a
nd o
ther
pay
men
tver
ifica
tion
If th
ere
are
incl
usio
nary
fees
, cal
ls P
lann
ing
Dep
artm
entt
o si
gn o
ff an
d if
the
Pla
nner
is n
ot a
vaila
ble,
call
thei
r bos
s to
ver
ify th
e fe
eA
pplic
ant t
akes
a n
umbe
r and
wai
tsC
usto
mer
wai
t tim
e no
t tra
cked
SFU
SD
, Cal
-OS
HA
,E
tc. .
..
Rec
eive
oth
erfe
es.
Mus
t go
to o
ther
Dep
t to
pay
Ret
urn
to D
BI t
opa
y is
suan
cefe
es
Site
Per
mit
Issu
ed w
ith n
oA
dden
dum
Sch
edul
e
$
$
$
Beg
inA
dden
dum
Sub
mitt
al
15 C
alen
dar D
ays
App
eal P
erio
d(If
not
pur
suan
t to
Con
ditio
nalU
se
SFFD
1660
Mis
sion
St.,
2nd
Flo
orD
BI P
lan
Rev
iew
Ser
vice
s16
60 M
issi
on S
t., 2
nd F
loor
DP
W-B
SM
1660
Mis
sion
St,
1st
Floo
r
DP
H13
90 M
arke
tSt
Rev
iew
s, s
ends
out p
lan
chec
kco
mm
ents
ifne
eded
to
appl
ican
t, de
sign
prof
essi
onal
and
aco
urte
sy fa
xto
plan
runn
erA
pplic
ant m
akes
Rec
heck
appo
intm
ent w
ithP
lan
Exam
iner
Pic
ksup
dai
ly fr
om 2
nd fl
oorb
inLo
gs in
to P
TSR
evie
ws
for s
treet
/sid
ewal
k ge
nera
l iss
ues
App
lican
tgoe
s on
sep
arat
e ap
plic
atio
n w
ithD
PW
-BU
F an
d D
PW
-BS
MTu
rnar
ound
tim
e 5
Bus
ines
s D
ays
Tells
app
lican
t bef
oreh
and
to fi
lea
full
set
to 8
75 S
teve
nson
St.
offic
e, w
ho w
ill e
mai
lth
e in
form
atio
n ba
ck to
Sta
tion
4 D
PW
-B
SM
sta
ffG
ener
al p
erm
ittin
g in
form
atio
n is
not
avai
labl
e on
DB
I web
site
Pic
ks u
p fro
m S
FFD
bin
Ass
igne
d M
on. a
nd T
ues.
mor
ning
Ass
ign
on P
TS a
ccor
ding
toba
cklo
gTu
rnar
ound
tim
e 3-
4 w
eeks
for
Hig
h R
ise
Put
into
Pla
n E
xam
iner
’s b
inG
ener
al p
erm
ittin
gin
form
atio
n is
no
t ava
ilabl
e on
DB
I web
site
(Pre
app
licat
ion
cove
rsw
ater
flow
cal
cula
tions
, pre
limin
ary
Sm
oke
cont
rol)
SFR
A1
Sou
th V
an N
ess,
5th fl
oor
Wis
hes
to b
ela
st fo
r rev
iew
/ap
prov
al o
n si
te p
erm
iton
lyfo
r cer
tain
jobs
Gen
eral
perm
ittin
gin
form
atio
n is
no
t ava
ilabl
eon
DB
I web
site
May
or’s
Offi
ceO
nD
isab
ility
401
Van
Nes
s, R
m 3
00
All p
erm
itsus
ing
any
publ
ic fu
nds
are
hand
car
ried
to M
OD
for
revi
ewO
ffice
is o
ffsite
Gen
eral
per
mitt
ing
info
rmat
ion
isno
t ava
ilabl
eon
DB
I web
site
RE
CH
EC
K A
PP
OIN
TME
NT
App
lican
t com
pile
s al
lsta
mpe
d se
ts in
to 2
set
s of
pla
nsA
nd c
oord
inat
es S
ign
Off
Par
ty
Rec
heck
app
oint
men
t is
mad
e w
ith th
e P
lan
Exa
min
erdi
rect
ly o
r with
DB
IPla
nR
evie
w S
ervi
ces
Sta
ffA
pplic
ant a
nd P
lan
Exa
min
erm
eet a
nd g
o ov
er p
lans
toge
ther
If ok
ay, P
lan
Exa
min
erst
amps
and
sig
ns o
ffIf
mor
e ch
ange
s ne
ed to
be
mad
e,A
pplic
ant m
ust m
ake
chan
ges,
and
resc
hedu
le a
n ap
poin
tmen
t to
mee
t aga
in
Sig
n O
ff Pa
rty
Put
all r
eche
ck c
hang
essh
eets
toD
BI P
lan
Rev
iew
Ser
vice
sD
BI P
lan
Rev
iew
Ser
vice
s16
60 M
issi
onS
t., 2
nd F
loor
Pla
nnin
gD
epar
tmen
tN
ot in
clus
iona
ryho
usin
g
SFR
A1
Sou
th V
an N
ess
Pro
ject
spo
nsor
file
sO
wne
r Par
ticip
atio
nA
gree
men
t
Planning DepartmentClerk picks up plans every dayCPB logs out on PTSPlanning Departmentlogs in on PTSRoute to quadrant team leader who already approvedfrom discretionaryreview/environmental (all beforesubmitting to DBI)Adds CPZOC on routing fir for inclusionary housing permits
Applicant returnswith additional sets
8:00
AM
–5:
00 P
MS
ign
in o
n th
e cl
ipbo
ard
and
wai
t to
be c
alle
dR
evie
w a
pplic
atio
n fo
r SFF
Dco
de c
ompl
ianc
eId
entif
y ot
her p
erm
its re
quire
dC
usto
mer
wai
t tim
eno
ttra
cked
SFF
D a
ssem
bly
and
high
rise
data
base
is n
ot d
igita
l or
linke
d to
DB
I’s d
atab
ase
Gen
eral
per
mitt
ing
info
rmat
ion
is n
ot a
vaila
ble
on D
BI w
ebsi
te
Offi
ce is
offs
iteG
ener
al p
erm
ittin
gin
form
atio
nis
not
ava
ilabl
e on
DB
I web
site
Offi
ce is
offs
iteN
o au
tom
ated
way
of k
now
ing
if a
proj
ect i
s in
a
SFR
A z
one
Gen
eral
per
mitt
ing
info
rmat
ion
isno
t ava
ilabl
eon
DB
I web
site
Pay
men
t is
mad
eof
fsite
Lege
nd:A
UTO
MA
TIO
N C
OM
MEN
TAR
Y ar
e in
Blu
e Ita
lic
8:00
AM
–3:
45 P
MC
usto
mer
sig
ns in
Sr.
Pla
nE
xam
iner
che
cks
for
com
plet
enes
s ba
sed
on w
hat y
our
subm
ittal
nee
ds –
nec
essa
rydo
cum
ents
,ref
eren
ce d
raw
ings
, cop
yof
Site
Per
mit
Pack
age
forE
AC
Had
dend
um w
ith n
umbe
r of s
ets
for
num
ber o
f sta
tions
Atta
ches
Add
endu
m c
ard
Ver
ifies
cor
rect
rout
ing
Sta
mps
and
logs
into
PTS
App
lican
t sig
ns a
dden
da c
ard
Ifap
plic
ant b
rings
less
set
sth
anth
enu
mbe
r of s
tatio
ns,t
hey
can
brin
g it
late
rC
usto
mer
wai
t tim
e no
t tra
cked
8:00
AM
–5:
00 P
MTa
ke a
num
ber (
5 –
60 m
in. w
ait)
Che
ck e
ntitl
emen
tsV
erify
pro
perty
info
on P
lann
ing
Dep
artm
ent d
atab
ase
If hi
stor
ical
, cus
tom
er m
ust t
alk
to a
hist
oric
al p
rese
rvat
ioni
st–
hist
oric
alpr
eser
vatio
nist
s ar
e on
ly a
t the
cou
nter
2.5
hour
s pe
r day
Che
ck B
BN
, Pla
nnin
g vi
olat
ion,
½ fe
e, e
tc.
Iden
tify
Pla
nner
for r
outin
gIf
ok, i
nitia
l AC
CE
PT
on ro
utin
g sl
ipC
usto
mer
wai
t tim
e no
t tra
cked
Gen
eral
per
mitt
ing
info
rmat
ion
is n
otav
aila
ble
on D
BI w
ebsi
te
Site
Per
mit
Issu
ed
DB
I Int
ake
Cou
nter
1660
Mis
sion
St
4th F
loor
App
lican
t ret
urns
with
min
imum
2se
ts o
f pla
ns w
ith c
lear
ly m
arke
dco
ver s
heet
say
ing
wha
t the
yar
e su
bmitt
ing
for
Pla
nnin
g D
epar
tmen
tIn
form
atio
n C
ount
er (P
IC)
(1st
Floo
r Sta
tion
1)
Sep
tem
ber 5
,200
7
BP
R -
Aut
omat
ion
Sub
com
mitt
ee A
s-Is
Map
ping
: Res
iden
tial D
emol
ition
/New
Con
stru
ctio
n–
Add
endu
m
If thereare changes to the SitePermit that impactPlanning Department, must be routedto Planning Department.
DB
I Pla
nR
evie
w S
ervi
ces
1660
Mis
sion
St.
2nd F
loor
Inte
rnal
Rou
ting
No
Cha
nges
to S
ite
8:00
AM
–4:
45 P
MA
rriv
es in
bac
kva
ult
Wor
kloa
dM
anag
er d
eter
min
es n
umbe
r of h
ours
for
revi
ewD
eter
min
es n
ext a
vaila
ble
Plan
Exa
min
erw
ith th
ele
ast b
ack
log
Ver
ifies
rout
ing
If ad
ditio
nal s
ets
are
need
ed,
Cal
lsap
plic
ant t
o su
bmit
per r
outin
g
DB
I Stru
ctur
al P
lan
Rev
iew
1660
Mis
sion
St.,
2nd
Flo
or
RE
CH
EC
K A
PP
OIN
TME
NT
Rec
heck
app
oint
men
t is
mad
e w
ithth
e st
aff
App
lican
t and
Pla
n E
xam
iner
mee
t and
go
over
pla
ns to
geth
erIf
okay
, Pla
n E
xam
iner
sta
mps
and
sig
ns o
ffIf
mor
e ch
ange
sne
edto
be
mad
e, A
pplic
ant m
ust m
ake
chan
ges,
and
resc
hedu
lean
appo
intm
ent t
o m
eeta
gain
If there aremajor changes,MUSTsubmit alternative Site Permit
DB
I Pla
n R
evie
w S
ervi
ces
staf
f ver
ifies
all
need
ed s
tam
psfro
m o
ther
div
isio
ns a
nd d
epar
tmen
ts
WO
RK
UN
DE
RW
AY
DB
IPla
n R
evie
w S
ervi
ces
1660
Mis
sion
St.,
2nd
Flo
or
App
lican
t ret
urns
with
add
ition
alse
ts
No
resp
onse
Upo
n ex
pira
tion
date
,ap
plic
ant i
s se
nt a
w
arni
ng le
tter.
Ove
r the
Cou
nter
(See
OTC
with
Pla
ns M
ap)
If O
TCS
eria
lR
evie
w
Cancelled by CPB uponrequest of Plan Examiner
Exp
ires
in …
(fro
m h
old
date
):$1
~ $
99,9
99 –
39 C
alen
dar
Day
s$1
00K
~ $
1 M
illio
n –
69C
alen
dar D
ays
$1 M
illio
n+ -
99 C
alen
dar
Day
sN
o au
tom
ated
syst
em to
track
exp
iratio
n
Pay
s E
xten
sion
Fee
of $
32.8
0 w
ithD
BI P
lan
Rev
iew
Ser
vice
s on
2nd
Flo
or
SFF
D16
60 M
issi
on S
t.,2nd
Flo
orD
BI S
truct
ural
Pla
n R
evie
w16
60 M
issi
on S
t., 2
nd F
loor
DPW
-BS
M16
60 M
issi
on S
t,1st
Flo
or
DP
H13
90 M
arke
tSt
Rev
iew
s, s
ends
out p
lan
chec
kco
mm
ents
ifne
eded
to
appl
ican
t, de
sign
prof
essi
onal
and
a
cour
tesy
fax
to
plan
runn
erA
pplic
ant m
akes
Rec
heck
appo
intm
ent w
ithP
lan
Exa
min
er
Pic
ks u
p da
ily fr
om 2
nd fl
oor b
inLo
gs in
to P
TSR
evie
ws
for s
treet
/sid
ewal
k ge
nera
l iss
ues
App
lican
t goe
s on
sep
arat
e ap
plic
atio
nw
ithD
PW
-BU
F an
d D
PW-B
SM
if th
ere
is tr
ee a
ndla
ndsc
ape
Turn
arou
nd ti
me
5 B
usin
ess
Day
sTe
lls a
pplic
ant b
efor
ehan
d to
file
a fu
ll se
t to
875
Ste
vens
on S
t. of
fice,
who
will
em
ail t
he
info
rmat
ion
back
to S
tatio
n 4
DP
W-B
SM
sta
ff
Pic
ks u
p fro
m S
FFD
bin
Ass
igne
d M
on.a
nd T
ues.
mor
ning
Ass
ign
on P
TSac
cord
ing
to
back
log
Turn
arou
nd ti
me
3-4
wee
ksfo
r Hig
h R
ise
Put
into
Pla
n E
xam
iner
’sbi
n(P
re a
pplic
atio
n co
vers
wat
er fl
owca
lcul
atio
ns,
prel
imin
ary
Smok
e co
ntro
l)S
FFD
’sas
sem
bly
and
high
rise
data
base
is n
ot d
igita
lor
linke
d to
DB
I’s d
atab
ase
Gen
eral
per
mitt
ing
info
rmat
ion
is n
ot a
vaila
ble
on D
BI w
ebsi
te
SFR
A1
Sou
thV
an N
ess,
5th fl
oor
Wis
hes
to b
e la
st fo
r rev
iew
/app
rova
l on
site
per
mit
only
for
certa
in jo
bsO
ffice
isof
fsite
No
auto
mat
ed w
ay o
f kno
win
gif
a pr
ojec
t is
in a
SFR
A z
one
Gen
eral
per
mitt
ing
info
rmat
ion
is n
ot a
vaila
ble
on D
BI w
ebsi
te
May
or’s
Offi
ce O
nD
isab
ility
401
Van
Nes
s, R
m 3
00
All
perm
its u
sing
any
pub
lic fu
nds
are
hand
car
ried
to M
OD
for r
evie
wO
ffice
is o
ffsite
Gen
eral
per
mitt
ing
info
rmat
ion
isno
tav
aila
ble
on D
BI w
ebsi
te
Appl
ican
t com
pile
s al
l wor
king
sta
mpe
d se
ts in
to2
sets
of f
inal
pla
nsP
uts
all r
eche
ck c
hang
es s
heet
s to
geth
er
DBI
Mec
hani
cal P
lan
Rev
iew
1660
Mis
sion
St.,
2nd
Flo
or
DP
W-B
SM
1660
Mis
sion
St,
1st F
loor
SFF
D16
60 M
issi
on S
t.,2nd
Flo
or
DB
I Mec
hani
cal P
lan
Rev
iew
1660
Mis
sion
St.,
2nd
Flo
or
Rev
iew
s fo
rM
echa
nica
lC
ode
Com
plia
nce
Par
alle
lRev
iew
with
Mul
tiple
Set
s of
Pla
nsan
d co
pies
of p
erm
it ap
plic
atio
nR
oute
d to
app
ropr
iate
sta
tions
Sign
Off
Par
ties
It is
then
the
appl
ican
t'sre
spon
sibi
lity
to c
onta
ct th
e in
divi
dual
dep
artm
ents
for f
inal
sign
off
mee
tings
, onc
e al
lof
the
plan
che
ck c
omm
ents
hav
e be
en a
ddre
ssed
.
Put
all
rech
eck
chan
ges
shee
tsto
DB
I Pla
n R
evie
wS
ervi
ces
DB
I Cen
tral P
erm
it B
urea
u16
60 M
issi
onS
t, 1st
Flo
or
No
Res
pons
e
Applicant brings additional sets and copies of permit application
Responsible fordistribution
Inco
mpl
ete.
Fax
Com
men
ts to
App
lican
t.A
pplic
ant s
ubm
its o
n 2nd
floo
r*M
akes
sur
e th
e ch
ange
sdo
esno
t con
flict
with
oth
er a
genc
ies
DP
W-B
SM
875
Stev
enso
n
DP
W-B
UF
Cal
l 641
-264
6
Recheck Appointment
Rec
heck
App
oint
men
t
Rev
ised
pla
n ro
uted
inte
rnal
ly
Type
s of
Add
endu
ms:
-Mec
hani
cal/
Ele
ctric
al /
Plu
mbi
ng (
incl
udes
Sm
oke
Con
trol)
-Spr
inkl
er /
SFF
D A
larm
-Fou
ndat
ion
-Sup
erst
ruct
ure
-Arc
hite
ctur
al-E
xter
ior W
all
Brin
gs re
vise
d pl
ans
forD
PW
-BSM
*Fo
r eac
h ad
dend
umsu
bmitt
al
Offi
ce is
offs
iteG
ener
alpe
rmitt
ing
info
rmat
ion
is n
otav
aila
ble
on D
BI
web
site
Lege
nd:A
UTO
MA
TIO
N C
OM
MEN
TAR
Yar
e in
Blu
e Ita
lic
8:00
AM
–3:
45 P
MC
usto
mer
sig
ns in
Sr.
Pla
n E
xam
iner
che
cks
for c
ompl
eten
ess
Dev
elop
s R
outin
gon
Com
pute
rP
rope
rty in
form
atio
n is
man
ually
ent
ered
into
PTS
.N
o w
ayof
ver
ifyin
g da
taC
usto
mer
wai
t tim
e no
ttra
cked
8:00
AM
–5:
00 P
MTa
ke a
num
ber (
5 –
60 m
in.w
ait)
Che
ck e
ntitl
emen
tsV
erify
pro
perty
info
on P
lann
ing
Dep
artm
entd
atab
ase
If hi
stor
ical
, cus
tom
er m
ust t
alk
to a
his
toric
al p
rese
rvat
ioni
st –
hist
oric
al p
rese
rvat
ioni
sts
are
only
at th
e co
unte
r 2.5
hou
rs p
erda
yC
heck
BB
N, P
lann
ing
viol
atio
n, ½
fee,
etc
.Id
entif
y P
lann
er fo
rrou
ting
If ok
, ini
tial A
CC
EP
T on
rout
ing
slip
Cus
tom
er w
ait t
ime
not t
rack
edD
CP
dat
abas
e is
not
tied
to D
BI’s
Gen
eral
per
mitt
ing
info
rmat
ion
is n
ot a
vaila
ble
on D
BI w
ebsi
te
STA
RT
DB
I Int
ake
Cou
nter
1660
Mis
sion
St
4th F
loor
Freq
uent
or E
xper
ienc
ed C
usto
mer
sw
ith P
erm
it Fo
rm a
ttach
edw
ith P
re-A
pplic
atio
n.Le
tter,
othe
r per
mit
appr
oval
cond
ition
s a
nd tr
eedi
sclo
sure
sta
tem
ent w
ith2
sets
of S
ite P
erm
it P
lans
.
Pla
nnin
g D
epar
tmen
tIn
form
atio
n C
ount
er(P
IC)
(1st
Floo
r Sta
tion
1)
DP
W –
BS
M(1
stFl
oor,
Stat
ion
4)
SFF
D P
lan
Rev
iew
(4th F
loor
)
Sep
tem
ber 5
, 200
7
BP
R -
Aut
omat
ion
Sub
com
mitt
ee A
s-Is
Map
ping
: New
Hig
h R
ise
– S
ite P
erm
it
Vol
unta
ryP
re A
pplic
atio
n P
hase
Pla
nnin
g D
epar
tmen
t16
50 M
issi
on S
t.4th
Flo
or
DB
I16
60 M
issi
onS
t2nd
Flo
or
8:00
AM
–5:
00 P
MS
ubm
it ap
plic
atio
nfo
rmw
ith $
710
fee
Inta
ke b
y cl
erk,
give
n to
qu
adra
nt; s
ched
ule
appo
intm
ent (
incl
udes
envi
ronm
enta
l and
his
toric
alre
view
)Tw
o w
eek
wai
t for
appo
intm
ent f
or a
n ad
viso
rym
eetin
gN
othi
ng is
writ
ten,
but
they
ca
n re
ques
t for
a w
ritte
nle
tter o
f det
erm
inat
ion
from
the
Zoni
ng A
dmin
istra
tor
If no
t sat
isfie
d, h
ave
the
Zoni
ng A
dmin
istra
tor t
o w
rite
a le
tter a
nd th
e le
tter
can
be a
ppea
led
thro
ugh
Boa
rd o
f App
eals
8:00
AM
–5:
00 P
MS
ubm
it le
tter w
ith fe
eIn
clud
es S
FFD
,Bui
ldin
gE
ngin
eerin
g/M
echa
nica
l,et
c.P
lan
Rev
iew
Ser
vice
sst
affr
evie
ws
and
deci
des
who
sho
uld
atte
nd (D
BI,
Pla
nnin
g D
epar
tmen
t,S
FFD
)P
re A
pplic
atio
n te
amle
ader
48ho
urs
to a
rran
gem
eetin
gTe
n da
ys to
con
duct
mee
ting
Acc
eptf
ees
for a
genc
ies
Lette
r of D
eter
min
atio
ndr
afte
d w
ithin
2 w
eeks
Lette
r may
be
appe
aled
thro
ugh
the
chai
n of
com
man
d to
Dire
ctor
8:00
AM
–5:
00 P
MC
all 8
-606
0 fro
m h
ouse
pho
neR
evie
w fo
r com
plet
enes
sId
entif
y ot
her p
erm
its re
quire
dD
atab
ase
not l
inke
d to
DB
I’sG
ener
al p
erm
ittin
g in
form
atio
n is
nota
vaila
ble
on D
BI w
ebsi
teC
usto
mer
wai
t tim
e no
t tra
cked
DB
I Cen
tral P
erm
itB
urea
u(1
st F
loor
)
8:00
AM
–4:
30 P
MTa
ke a
num
ber a
nd
wai
tC
usto
mer
pay
s pl
anch
eck
fees
Put
s in
bin
for
Pla
nnin
g D
epar
tmen
tpi
ck u
pC
usto
mer
wai
t tim
eno
t tra
cked
Plan
ning
Dep
artm
ent
1650
Mis
sion
St.
Sui
te 4
00
8:00
AM
–5:
00P
MR
evie
w b
y P
lann
erVe
rifie
s th
atco
nditi
ons
of
appr
oval
are
sho
wn
on p
lans
No
perfo
rman
cem
easu
res
in p
lace
.G
ener
al p
erm
ittin
gin
form
atio
n is
not
avai
labl
e on
DB
Iw
ebsi
te
DB
I Pla
n R
evie
w S
ervi
ces
1660
Mis
sion
St
2nd F
loor
Cle
rk o
f Pla
nnin
g D
epar
tmen
t del
iver
s to
DB
I
8:00
AM
–5:
00P
MC
hief
Cle
rkge
ts 2
set
s of
sta
mpe
d pl
ans
and
othe
rdo
cum
ents
.Lo
gs in
on
PTS
on
arriv
al d
ate
Puts
in b
ack
vaul
tW
orkl
oad
Man
ager
det
erm
ines
num
ber o
f hou
rs fo
rre
view
(for
site
Hig
hR
ise
–4
hrs)
Det
erm
ines
nex
t ava
ilabl
e P
lan
Exam
iner
with
the
leas
t bac
k lo
gVe
rifie
s ro
utin
g
Cal
ls a
pplic
ant t
o su
bmit
addi
tiona
lset
sof
plan
s pe
r rou
ting
SFP
UC
1660
Mis
sion
St.,
1st F
loor
Pic
ks u
p fro
mbi
nFe
es a
ssig
ned
Gen
eral
per
mitt
ing
info
rmat
ion
is n
otav
aila
ble
on D
BI w
ebsi
te
CP
B16
60 M
issi
onS
t.,1st
Flo
or
For i
nclu
sion
ary
hous
ing
8:00
AM
–4:
30 P
MC
alcu
late
fina
l fee
sC
alcu
late
Sch
ool F
ees,
Cal
-OS
HA
, and
oth
er p
aym
entv
erifi
catio
nIf
ther
e ar
e in
clus
iona
ry fe
es, c
alls
City
Pla
nnin
g to
sig
nof
f and
if th
e P
lann
er is
not
avai
labl
e,ca
ll th
eir b
oss
to v
erify
the
fee
App
lican
t tak
es a
num
ber a
nd w
aits
Cus
tom
erw
ait t
ime
not t
rack
ed
SFU
SD
, Cal
-OS
HA
,E
tc. .
..
Rec
eive
oth
erfe
es.
Mus
t go
to o
ther
Dep
t to
pay
Ret
urn
to D
BI t
opa
y is
suan
cefe
es
Site
Per
mit
Issu
ed w
ith n
o A
dden
dum
Sch
edul
e
$
$
$
Begi
nA
dden
dum
Sub
mitt
al
15 C
alen
dar D
ayAp
peal
Per
iod
(Ifno
t pur
suan
t to
Con
ditio
nalU
se
SFFD
1660
Mis
sion
St.,
2nd
Flo
orD
BI P
lan
Rev
iew
Ser
vice
s16
60 M
issi
on S
t., 2
nd F
loor
DP
W B
SM
1660
Mis
sion
St,
1st F
loor
DP
H13
90 M
arke
tSt
Rev
iew
s, s
ends
out p
lan
chec
kco
mm
ents
ifne
eded
to
appl
ican
t, de
sign
prof
essi
onal
and
aco
urte
sy fa
xto
plan
runn
erA
pplic
ant m
akes
Rec
heck
appo
intm
ent w
ithP
lan
Exam
iner
Pic
ks u
p da
ily fr
om 2
nd fl
oor b
inLo
gs in
to P
TSR
evie
ws
for s
treet
/sid
ewal
k ge
nera
l iss
ues
App
lican
t goe
son
sep
arat
e ap
plic
atio
n w
ithD
PW
-BU
F an
d D
PW
-BS
MTu
rnar
ound
tim
e5
Bus
ines
s D
ays
Tells
appl
ican
t bef
oreh
and
to fi
le a
full
set
to87
5 St
even
son
St.
offic
e, w
ho w
ill em
ail
the
info
rmat
ion
back
to S
tatio
n 4
DP
W-
BS
M s
taff
Gen
eral
per
mitt
ing
info
rmat
ion
is n
otav
aila
ble
on D
BI w
ebsi
te
Pic
ks u
p fro
m S
FFD
bin
Ass
igne
d M
on. a
nd T
ues.
mor
ning
Ass
ign
on P
TS a
ccor
ding
toba
cklo
gTu
rnar
ound
tim
e 3-
4 w
eeks
for
Hig
h R
ise
Put
into
Pla
n E
xam
iner
’s b
inG
ener
al p
erm
ittin
gin
form
atio
n is
no
t ava
ilabl
e on
DB
I web
site
(Pre
app
cove
rs w
ater
flow
calc
ulat
ions
, pre
limin
ary
Smok
eco
ntro
l)
SFR
A1
Sou
th V
an N
ess,
5th fl
oor
Wis
hes
to b
ela
st fo
r rev
iew
/ap
prov
al o
n si
te p
erm
iton
lyfo
r cer
tain
jobs
Gen
eral
perm
ittin
gin
form
atio
n is
no
t ava
ilabl
eon
DB
I web
site
May
or’s
Offi
ceO
nD
isab
ility
401
Van
Nes
s, R
m 3
00
All
perm
its u
sing
any
pub
lic fu
nds
are
hand
car
ried
to M
OD
for r
evie
wO
ffice
isof
fsite
Gen
eral
per
mitt
ing
info
rmat
ion
isno
t ava
ilabl
e on
DB
I web
site
RE
CH
EC
K A
PP
OIN
TME
NT
App
lican
t com
pile
s al
lsta
mpe
d se
ts in
to 2
set
s of
pla
nsA
nd c
oord
inat
es S
ign
Off
Par
ty
Rec
heck
app
oint
men
t is
mad
e w
ith th
e P
lan
Exa
min
erdi
rect
ly o
r with
DB
IPla
nR
evie
w S
ervi
ces
Sta
ffA
pplic
ant a
nd P
lan
Exa
min
erm
eet a
nd g
o ov
er p
lans
toge
ther
If ok
ay, P
lan
Exa
min
erst
amps
and
sig
ns o
ffIf
mor
e ch
ange
s ne
ed to
be
mad
e,A
pplic
ant m
ust m
ake
chan
ges,
and
resc
hedu
le a
n ap
poin
tmen
t to
mee
t aga
in
Sig
n O
ff Pa
rty
Put
all r
eche
ck c
hang
essh
eets
toD
BI P
lan
Rev
iew
Ser
vice
sD
BI P
lan
Rev
iew
Ser
vice
s16
60 M
issi
onS
t., 2
nd F
loor
Pla
nnin
gD
epar
tmen
tN
ot in
clus
iona
ryho
usin
g
SFR
A1
Sou
th V
an N
ess
Pro
ject
spo
nsor
file
sO
wne
r Par
ticip
atio
nA
gree
men
t
Planning DepartmentClerk picks up plans every dayCPB logs out on PTSPlanning Departmentlogs in on PTSRoute to quadrant team leader who already approvedfrom discretionaryreview/environmental (all beforesubmitting to DBI)Adds CPZOC on routing fir for inclusionary housing permits
Applicant returns withadditional sets
8:00
AM
–5:
00 P
MS
ign
in o
n th
e cl
ipbo
ard
and
wai
t to
be c
alle
dR
evie
w a
pplic
atio
nfo
r SFF
Dco
de c
ompl
ianc
eId
entif
y ot
her p
erm
its re
quire
dC
usto
mer
wai
ttim
e no
ttra
cked
SFF
D’s
ass
embl
y an
d hi
ghris
e da
taba
se is
not
dig
ital o
rlin
ked
to D
BI’s
data
base
Gen
eral
per
mitt
ing
info
rmat
ion
is n
ot a
vaila
ble
on D
BI w
ebsi
te
Offi
ce is
offs
iteG
ener
al p
erm
ittin
gin
form
atio
nis
not
ava
ilabl
e on
DB
I web
site
Offi
ce is
offs
iteN
o au
tom
ated
way
of k
now
ing
if a
proj
ect i
s in
a
SFR
A z
one
Gen
eral
per
mitt
ing
info
rmat
ion
isno
t ava
ilabl
eon
DB
I web
site
Pay
men
t is
mad
eof
fsite
Lege
nd:A
UTO
MA
TIO
N C
OM
MEN
TAR
Y ar
e in
Blu
e Ita
lic
8:00
AM
–3:
45 P
MC
usto
mer
sig
ns in
Sr.
Pla
n E
xam
iner
che
cks
for
com
plet
enes
s ba
sed
on w
hat
your
sub
mitt
al n
eeds
– n
eces
sary
docu
men
ts, r
efer
ence
draw
ings
,co
py o
f Site
Per
mit
Pack
age
for
EA
CH
add
endu
mw
ith n
umbe
r of
se
ts fo
r num
ber
of s
tatio
nsA
ttach
es A
dden
dum
car
d,V
erifi
es c
orre
ctro
utin
gS
tam
ps a
nd lo
gs in
toP
TSA
pplic
ant s
igns
add
enda
car
dIf
appl
ican
t brin
gs le
ss s
ets
than
the
num
ber
of s
tatio
ns, t
hey
can
brin
g it
late
rC
usto
mer
wai
t tim
e no
t tra
cked
8:00
AM
–5:
00 P
MTa
kea
num
ber (
5 –
60 m
in. w
ait)
Che
ck e
ntitl
emen
tsV
erify
pro
perty
info
on
Pla
nnin
gD
epar
tmen
t dat
abas
e.If
hist
oric
al, c
usto
mer
mus
t tal
k to
a
hist
oric
al p
rese
rvat
ioni
st –
his
toric
alpr
eser
vatio
nist
s ar
eon
ly a
t the
coun
ter 2
.5 h
ours
per
day
Che
ck B
BN, P
lann
ing
viol
atio
n, ½
fee,
etc.
Iden
tify
Pla
nner
for r
outin
gIf
ok, i
nitia
l AC
CE
PT
on ro
utin
g sl
ipC
usto
mer
wai
t tim
e no
t tra
cked
Gen
eral
per
mitt
ing
info
rmat
ion
isno
tav
aila
ble
on D
BI w
ebsi
te
Site
Per
mit
Issu
ed
DB
I Int
ake
Cou
nter
1660
Mis
sion
St
4th F
loor
App
lican
t ret
urns
with
min
imum
2se
ts o
f pla
ns w
ith c
lear
ly m
arke
dco
ver s
heet
say
ing
wha
t the
yar
e su
bmitt
ing
for
Pla
nnin
g D
epar
tmen
tIn
form
atio
n C
ount
er (P
IC)
(1st
Floo
r Sta
tion
1)
Sep
tem
ber 5
,200
7
BP
R -
Aut
omat
ion
Sub
com
mitt
ee A
s-Is
Map
ping
: New
Hig
h R
ise
-Add
endu
m
If thereare changes to the SitePermit that impactPlanning Department, must be routedto Planning Department.
DB
I Pla
n R
evie
w S
ervi
ces
1660
Mis
sion
St.
2nd F
loor
Inte
rnal
Rou
ting
No
Cha
nges
to S
ite8:00
AM
–4:
45 P
MA
rriv
es in
bac
kva
ult
Wor
kloa
dM
anag
er d
eter
min
es n
umbe
r of h
ours
for
revi
ewD
eter
min
es n
ext a
vaila
ble
Plan
Exa
min
erw
ith th
ele
ast b
ack
log
Ver
ifies
rout
ing
If ad
ditio
nal s
ets
are
need
ed,
Cal
ls a
pplic
ant t
o su
bmit
per r
outin
g
DB
I Stru
ctur
alP
lan
Rev
iew
1660
Mis
sion
St.,
2nd
Flo
or
RE
CH
EC
K A
PP
OIN
TME
NT
Rec
heck
app
oint
men
t is
mad
e w
ithth
e st
aff
App
lican
t and
Pla
n E
xam
iner
mee
t and
go
over
pla
ns to
geth
erIf
okay
, Pla
n E
xam
iner
sta
mps
and
sig
ns o
ffIf
mor
e ch
ange
sne
edto
be
mad
e, A
pplic
ant m
ust m
ake
chan
ges,
and
resc
hedu
lean
appo
intm
ent t
o m
eeta
gain
If there are majorchanges,MUST submit alternative Site Permit
DB
I Pla
n R
evie
w S
ervi
ces
staf
f ver
ifies
all
need
ed s
tam
psfro
m o
ther
div
isio
ns a
nd d
epar
tmen
ts
WO
RK
UN
DE
RW
AY
DB
IPla
n R
evie
w S
ervi
ces
1660
Mis
sion
St.,
2nd
Flo
or
App
lican
t ret
urns
with
add
ition
alse
ts
No
resp
onse
Upo
n ex
pira
tion
date
,ap
plic
ant i
s se
nt a
w
arni
ng le
tter.
Ove
r the
Cou
nter
(See
OTC
with
Pla
ns M
ap)
If O
TCS
eria
lR
evie
w
Cancelled by CPB uponrequest of Plan Examiner
Exp
ires
in …
(fro
m h
old
date
):$1
~ $
99,9
99 –
39 C
alen
dar
Day
s$1
00K
~ $
1 M
illio
n –
69 C
alen
dar D
ays
$1 M
illio
n+ -
99 C
alen
dar
Day
sN
o au
tom
ated
syst
em to
track
exp
iratio
n
Pay
s E
xten
sion
Fee
of $
32.8
0 w
ithD
BIP
lan
Rev
iew
Ser
vice
s on
2nd
Flo
or
SFF
D16
60 M
issi
on S
t.,2nd
Flo
orD
BI S
truct
ural
Pla
n R
evie
w16
60 M
issi
on S
t., 2
nd F
loor
DPW
-BS
M16
60 M
issi
on S
t,1st
Flo
or
DP
H13
90 M
arke
tSt
Rev
iew
s, s
ends
out
pl
an c
heck
com
men
tsif
need
ed to
app
lican
t,de
sign
pro
fess
iona
lan
da
cour
tesy
fax
topl
an ru
nner
App
lican
t mak
esR
eche
ck a
ppoi
ntm
ent
with
Pla
nE
xam
iner
Pick
sup
dai
ly fr
om2nd
floo
r bin
Logs
into
PTS
Rev
iew
sfo
r stre
et/s
idew
alk
gene
ral i
ssue
sAp
plic
ant g
oes
on s
epar
ate
appl
icat
ion
with
DP
W-
BUF
and
DPW
-BS
M if
ther
e is
tree
and
land
scap
eTu
rnar
ound
tim
e 5
Bus
ines
sD
ays
Tells
app
lican
tbef
oreh
and
to fi
le a
full
set t
o87
5 S
teve
nson
St.
offic
e, w
ho w
ill e
mai
l the
info
rmat
ion
back
to S
tatio
n nu
mbe
r 4 D
PW
-BS
Mst
aff
Pic
ks u
p fro
m S
FFD
bin
Ass
igne
d M
on. a
nd T
ues.
mor
ning
Ass
ign
on P
TS a
ccor
ding
to
back
log
Turn
arou
nd ti
me
3-4
wee
ksfo
r Hig
h R
ise
Put
into
Pla
n E
xam
iner
’sbi
n(P
re-a
pplic
atio
n co
vers
wat
er fl
ow c
alcu
latio
ns,
prel
imin
ary
Sm
oke
cont
rol)
SFF
D’s
ass
embl
y an
d hi
ghris
e da
taba
se is
not
dig
ital
or li
nked
to D
BI’s
data
base
Gen
eral
per
mitt
ing
info
rmat
ion
is n
ot a
vaila
ble
on D
BI w
ebsi
te
SFR
A1
Sou
thV
an N
ess,
5th fl
oor
Wis
hes
to b
e la
st fo
r rev
iew
/app
rova
l on
site
per
mit
only
for
certa
in jo
bsO
ffice
isof
fsite
No
auto
mat
edw
ay o
f kno
win
g if
a pr
ojec
t is
in a
re
deve
lopm
ent z
one
Gen
eral
per
mitt
ing
info
rmat
ion
isno
t ava
ilabl
e on
DB
Iw
ebsi
te
May
or’s
Offi
ce O
nD
isab
ility
401
Van
Nes
s, R
m 3
00
All
perm
its u
sing
any
pub
lic fu
nds
are
hand
car
ried
to M
OD
for r
evie
wO
ffice
is o
ffsite
Gen
eral
per
mitt
ing
info
rmat
ion
isno
tav
aila
ble
on D
BI w
ebsi
te
Appl
ican
t com
pile
s al
l wor
king
sta
mpe
d se
ts in
to2
sets
of f
inal
pla
nsP
uts
all r
eche
ck c
hang
es s
heet
s to
geth
er
DB
I Mec
hani
cal P
lan
Rev
iew
1660
Mis
sion
St.,
2nd
Flo
or
DP
W-B
SM
1660
Mis
sion
St,
1st F
loor
SFF
D16
60 M
issi
on S
t.,2nd
Flo
or
DB
I Mec
hani
cal P
lan
Rev
iew
1660
Mis
sion
St.,
2nd
Flo
orRev
iew
s fo
r M
echa
nica
lC
ode
Com
plia
nce
Par
alle
lRev
iew
with
Mul
tiple
Set
s of
Pla
nsan
d co
pies
of p
erm
it ap
plic
atio
nR
oute
d to
app
ropr
iate
sta
tions
Sign
Off
Par
ties
It is
then
the
appl
ican
t'sre
spon
sibi
lity
to c
onta
ct th
e in
divi
dual
dep
artm
ents
for f
inal
sign
off
mee
tings
, onc
e al
lof
the
plan
che
ck c
omm
ents
hav
e be
en a
ddre
ssed
.
Put
all
rech
eck
chan
ges
shee
tsto
DB
I Pla
n R
evie
wS
ervi
ces
DB
I Cen
tral P
erm
it B
urea
u16
60 M
issi
onS
t, 1st
Flo
or
No
Res
pons
e
Applicant bringsadditional setsand copies of permit application
Responsible for distribution
Inco
mpl
ete.
Fax
Com
men
ts to
App
lican
t.Ap
plic
ant s
ubm
its o
n 2nd
floo
r*M
akes
sur
e th
e ch
ange
sdo
es n
ot c
onfli
ct w
ith o
ther
agen
cies
DP
W-B
SM
875
Stev
enso
n
DP
W-B
UF
Cal
l 641
-264
6
Recheck Appointment
Rec
heck
App
oint
men
t
Rev
ised
pla
nro
uted
inte
rnal
ly
Type
s of
Add
endu
ms:
-Mec
hani
cal/
Ele
ctric
al /
Plu
mbi
ng (
incl
udes
Sm
oke
Con
trol)
-Spr
inkl
er /
SFF
D A
larm
-Fou
ndat
ion
-Sup
erst
ruct
ure
-Arc
hite
ctur
al-E
xter
ior W
all
Brin
gs re
vise
d pl
ans
for D
PW-B
SM
*Fo
r eac
h ad
dend
umsu
bmitt
al
Offi
ce is
offs
iteG
ener
alpe
rmitt
ing
info
rmat
ion
is n
otav
aila
ble
on D
BI
web
site
Lege
nd:A
UTO
MA
TIO
N C
OM
MEN
TAR
Y ar
e in
Blu
e Ita
lic
December 2007 Page 134
PERFORMANCE MEASURES
SUBCOMMITTEE REPORT
December 2007 Page 135
PERFORMANCE MEASURES SUBCOMMITTEE This subcommittee focused on the identification and development of quantifiable and measurable criteria applicable to all city agencies involved in the application and plan review, permit issuance and inspection processes. Charged with setting reasonable, practical and achievable goals/performance standards city wide, and thereby setting the baseline from which ongoing changes may be measured and acted upon, the subcommittee identified the following Key Findings and Recommendations: Key Findings:
• Lack of established turnaround time targets for plan reviews. • Lack of established turnaround time targets for inspections.
Key Recommendations:
• Implement the following performance measures and turnaround times. • Provide quarterly and annual reports to evaluate actual performance against established
measures and objectives.
Target:
1. To complete and issue to the project sponsor the initial comprehensive plan review comments within established turnaround times as described below, for at least 90% of projects. These turnaround times will apply to all review disciplines unless otherwise noted.
a. Small Projects: 10 business days from arrival date to review discipline.
• Simple one or two-story single family and duplex on level lot. • Minor modifications and additions to single multi-family residential,
commercial and industrial buildings. • Signs with structural calculations. • Commercial tenant-improvements with minor structural calculations. • Site retaining walls. • Foundation repairs. • Storage racks.
b. Medium Projects: 20 business days from arrival date to review discipline. • Three-story or more single family dwelling or duplex. • Custom, unusual single family dwelling including hillside with steel
substructure and/or concrete piers or caissons. • Two, three or four-story multi-family, commercial or office buildings. • Simple four-story multi-family residential project over a concrete podium. • Complex commercial and office tenant improvements with or without
structural calculations.
December 2007 Page 136
• Parking structures (up to three stories). • Assembly occupancies (churches, schools, restaurants with multiple dining
rooms, etc.). • Excavation and shoring. • Indoor swimming pool.
c. Large Projects: Turnaround times to be determined on a case by case basis
determined and provided to project sponsor at submittal time for all reviewing agencies (excluding Planning Department and SFRA). Note: These projects must go through completeness review by appointment only before intake. • Complex four or more stories commercial/office buildings or multi-family
project including buildings over a concrete podium. • High rise buildings. • Multiplex theatres/auditoriums. • Multi-story shopping centers/malls. • Convention centers. • Airport. • Wastewater and water treatment plants. • Projects subject to peer review.
2. For building permit application, Planning Department and SFRA to complete and
issue the initial comprehensive plan review comments/corrections, within 15 business days of arrival date, for 90% of projects.
3. To schedule all rechecks within three business days of request for at least 90% of
projects.
4. To distribute all submitted drawings to next review station within one business day for 90% of projects.
5. To schedule pre-application meetings for all city agencies, excluding Planning
Department and SFRA, within three business days of request and to be held within 10 business days for 90% of projects.
6. For Planning Department and SFRA, to schedule pre-application meetings within
three business days of request to be held within 15 business days for 90% of projects.
7. For all city agencies, to perform field inspections associated with DBI permits within
two business days of request for 90% of projects with a long-term goal of one business day.
8. For DBI and SFFD, to respond to life hazards/life safety/lack of heat complaints
within one business day for 100% of requests.
December 2007 Page 137
APPENDIX
December 2007 Page 138
BENCHMARKING SURVEYS
December 2007 Page 139
Plan Review and Permit Issuance Subcommittee Benchmarking Survey - Sample Comments CUSTOMER SERVICE QUESTION 2: What is the level of technical expertise for the staff at the general information counter?
• Experienced clerical staff. • Plan Check Techs with Plans Examiner Certification. • Tech II – moderate. • Certified Plans Examiner. • Very basic minimum.
QUESTION 6: What is the average wait time at each station?
• Customer only needs to go to one “One-Stop” counter to submit plans or pick up approved permit. 50% of customers wait less than 10 minutes, 75% of customers wait less than 20 minutes. Tracked using automated customer tracking system. Over the counter permits may require going to more than one station in the same lobby. Generally no wait at other stations (planning, plan check) after getting initial service at main counter. Priority counter service (different queue for automated customer tracking system) for homeowners and residential remodel contractors.
• One time wait max of 20 minutes. • 3 hours. • 15 minutes.
PERMIT REVIEW QUESTION 2: What type of work is exempt from permit review?
• Minor electrical, mechanical, plumbing, appliance replacements. • Small accessory structures, retaining walls less than 4 feet in ht, most residential MEP
work is sold simple permit followed by field inspection. • Generally repairs less than $1000.00, painting, carpeting, re-roofing with the same
material (residential only), walls less than 30" in height, temporary tents less than 14 days, residential television and radio antennas, storage buildings less than 120 sq. ft. See also chap. 18 of local amendments.
• All work is reviewed to insure compliance with zoning “regs” and at least a cursory construction review, but garages and other simple projects are normally reviewed at the counter and permits issued immediately.
December 2007 Page 140
QUESTION 13: Do you offer expedited plan review?
• No, we commit to and meet reasonable plan check timeframes. We accommodate special requests and needs for expediting where possible as long as standard timeframes are not impacted.
• We do not expedite reviews but we do have programs that allow for scheduling of reviews to match the development requirements of projects.
DBI BPR Plan Review Benchmarking Survey
1. Contact person for this survey:
Response
Percent
Response
Count
Name 100.0% 11
Phone 100.0% 11
Fax 81.8% 9
Email 100.0% 11
answered question 11
skipped question 5
2. How the customer is greeted
Yes NoResponse
Count
Is there a general information
counter?91.7% (11) 8.3% (1) 12
answered question 12
skipped question 4
3. What is the level of technical expertise for the staff at the general information counter?
Response
Count
11
answered question 11
skipped question 5
Page 1
4. Are there tutorials for the public in:
Yes NoResponse
Count
Permit process/procedures 63.6% (7) 36.4% (4) 11
Code changes/customer training 30.0% (3) 70.0% (7) 10
answered question 11
skipped question 5
5. What are the minimum standards for intake drawings?
Response
Count
9
answered question 9
skipped question 7
6. Is there an automated on-site intake/customer tracking system while in the building?
Response
Percent
Response
Count
No 70.0% 7
Yes 30.0% 3
answered question 10
skipped question 6
7. What is the average wait time at each station?
Response
Count
9
answered question 9
skipped question 7
Page 2
8. Are Building and Planning Departments separate or combined?
Response
Percent
Response
Count
Separate 55.6% 5
Combined 44.4% 4
answered question 9
skipped question 7
9. What type of work is exempt from permit review?
Response
Count
9
answered question 9
skipped question 7
10. Do you have Over the Counter (OTC) Plan Checking Services?
Response
Percent
Response
Count
No 22.2% 2
Yes 77.8% 7
If yes, what % of plan review is OTC? 7
answered question 9
skipped question 7
11. What scope of work can be reviewed OTC?
Response
Count
6
answered question 6
skipped question 10
Page 3
12. Is OTC review done on a walk-in basis?
Response
Percent
Response
Count
No 0.0% 0
Yes 100.0% 9
answered question 9
skipped question 7
13. Do you offer enhanced services for OTC review for an additional fee?
Response
Percent
Response
Count
No 88.9% 8
Yes 11.1% 1
If yes, what kind? 1
answered question 9
skipped question 7
Page 4
14. Which plan check disciplines are included in OTC service?
Response
Percent
Response
Count
Building 100.0% 9
Fire 44.4% 4
Mechanical 66.7% 6
Electrical 66.7% 6
Zoning 100.0% 9
Public Works 22.2% 2
Other 22.2% 2
Please specify 2
answered question 9
skipped question 7
15. Plan Checking
Yes NoResponse
Count
Do you use third party plan check
services?66.7% (6) 33.3% (3) 9
Peer review for structural design? 14.3% (1) 85.7% (6) 7
Do you have electrical plan
checking?62.5% (5) 37.5% (3) 8
Do you have plumbing plan
checking?87.5% (7) 12.5% (1) 8
Is there parallel (concurrent) plan
checking for both Building and allied
Departments (ie., Planning, Fire,
Public Works, Accessibility,
Mechanical, etc.)?
66.7% (6) 33.3% (3) 9
What qualifies for parallel process? 5
answered question 9
skipped question 7
Page 5
16. Do you offer enhanced plan check service for additional fee?
Response
Percent
Response
Count
No 66.7% 6
Yes 33.3% 3
If yes, what kind? 5
answered question 9
skipped question 7
17. Is there separate review of disabled access laws for publicly funded projects in addition to standard plan checking?
Response
Percent
Response
Count
No 100.0% 8
Yes 0.0% 0
answered question 8
skipped question 8
18. Do you return drawings to applicant after initial review?
Response
Percent
Response
Count
No 44.4% 4
Yes 55.6% 5
answered question 9
skipped question 7
Page 6
19. At what point does a revision/field change require a new permit?
Response
Count
8
answered question 8
skipped question 8
20. Do you offer expedited plan review?
Response
Percent
Response
Count
No 66.7% 6
Yes 33.3% 3
If yes, for what types of projects? 4
answered question 9
skipped question 7
21. Does an individual plan reviewer review all types of projects(ie: commercial, residential, new and existing)?
Response
Percent
Response
Count
No 22.2% 2
Yes 77.8% 7
answered question 9
skipped question 7
Page 7
22. Does an individual plan checker review multiple disciplines (ie., building, mechanical, fire, zoning, etc.)?
Response
Percent
Response
Count
No 33.3% 3
Yes 66.7% 6
If yes, what disciplines? 5
answered question 9
skipped question 7
23. Fee payment
Response
Percent
Response
Count
One main cashier 81.8% 9
Different locations 18.2% 2
answered question 11
skipped question 5
Page 8
December 2007 Page 149
Inspection Subcommittee Benchmarking Survey - Sample Comments QUESTION 5: Are there inspection benchmarks/objectives set by management? If yes, what are they?
• All inspections completed within 24 hours. • Check for conformance for all permit requirements pertaining to a permit (to include but
not limited to: zoning, building, electrical, plumbing, energy efficiency, NPDES) minimum number of inspection dependent upon area, type and unit
• Monthly list of inspections by district QUESTION 12: Do you have specialty inspectors? If Yes, for what disciplines and what projects?
• Plumbing/Mechanical Electrical For commercial projects • Roofing and elevators. Zoning and public works. • Plumbing, electrical, building, commercial complaints, mechanical, manufactured
housing, Business license, regulate 1200 special inspectors QUESTION 21: How do other departments such as Planning, Fire, Health, Public Works, etc. coordinate with Building Inspection staff?
• Fire, Public Works- Field coordination at inspector and supervisor level. Regular supervisor and management level meetings. Planning- Consult planning staff in office (on same floor as inspection, plan check.
• Verbal, work orders (computer, electronic) • Through the busy system (main frame). • By fax or by phone daily if required.
DBI BPR Inspection Survey
1. Contact person for this survey
Response
Percent
Response
Count
Name 100.0% 8
Phone 87.5% 7
Fax 62.5% 5
Email 87.5% 7
answered question 8
skipped question 1
2. How do you schedule your inspections?
Response
Percent
Response
Count
Online service 44.4% 4
Email 0.0% 0
Personally by phone 77.8% 7
Integrated Voice Recognition
System (IVR)55.6% 5
In person - with in office/counter,
on the field/site77.8% 7
Fax 22.2% 2
Other 11.1% 1
Other (please specify) 1
answered question 9
skipped question 0
Page 1
3. Is there a cut off time for scheduling an inspection?
Response
Percent
Response
Count
No 33.3% 3
Yes 66.7% 6
answered question 9
skipped question 0
4. What is the average number of inspection per inspector per day?
Response
Percent
Response
Count
What is the average number of
stops per inspector per day?100.0% 8
answered question 8
skipped question 1
5. Are there inspection benchmarks/objectives set by management?
Response
Percent
Response
Count
No 62.5% 5
Yes 37.5% 3
If yes, what are they? 3
answered question 8
skipped question 1
Page 2
6. Inspections are quantified by
Response
Percent
Response
Count
Site visits 44.4% 4
Permit application number(s) 22.2% 2
Type of inspection (ie., plumbing,
electrical, building, framing, health,
complaint, etc.)
77.8% 7
answered question 9
skipped question 0
7. When you schedule an inspection, what timeframe is offered?
Response
Percent
Response
Count
Hour by hour 33.3% 3
AM, PM 22.2% 2
Other 44.4% 4
Please specify 4
answered question 9
skipped question 0
Page 3
8. What are the turn around time for inspections/inspections response?
Response
Percent
Response
Count
24 Hours 77.8% 7
48 Hours 11.1% 1
Same Day 0.0% 0
As Requested 11.1% 1
Other (please specify) 0.0% 0
answered question 9
skipped question 0
9. Do you have combo-inspectors (Building + Electrical + Plumbing)?
Response
Percent
Response
Count
No 33.3% 3
Yes 66.7% 6
If yes, for what kind of projects? 3
answered question 9
skipped question 0
Page 4
10. How many inspectors do you have?
Response
Average
Response
Total
Response
Count
Building 22.00 110 5
Plumbing 10.50 42 4
Electrical 9.75 39 4
Health 0.00 0 0
Fire 0.00 0 0
Combo inspections 25.40 127 5
Special inspections 11.50 23 2
Public Works 42.00 42 1
Disability access 17.00 17 1
Other 8.00 8 1
Total 40.75 163 4
answered question 8
skipped question 1
Page 5
11. How many supervisory inspectors do you have?
Response
Average
Response
Total
Response
Count
Building 3.50 21 6
Plumbing 0.75 3 4
Electrical 0.75 3 4
Health 0.00 0 0
Fire 0.00 0 0
Combo inspections 5.00 15 3
Special inspections 2.00 2 1
Public Works 2.00 4 2
Disability access 0.00 0 0
Other 3.00 6 2
Total 5.00 10 2
answered question 9
skipped question 0
12. Do you have specialty inspectors?
Response
Percent
Response
Count
No 66.7% 6
Yes 33.3% 3
If Yes, for what disciplines and what projects? 3
answered question 9
skipped question 0
Page 6
13. How are inspections requests distributed?
Response
Percent
Response
Count
District (geographical boundaries) 88.9% 8
Other (please specify) 11.1% 1
answered question 9
skipped question 0
14. Do you provide the following inspections? If yes, are they inspected by specialty inspectors or combo inspectors?
Does not apply Specialty Inspector Combination InspectorResponse
Count
Landscaping 75.0% (3) 25.0% (1) 25.0% (1) 4
Storm water 75.0% (3) 25.0% (1) 25.0% (1) 4
Environmentally sensitive lands 100.0% (4) 0.0% (0) 0.0% (0) 4
Public improvements 60.0% (3) 20.0% (1) 20.0% (1) 5
Grading 50.0% (2) 25.0% (1) 25.0% (1) 4
Traffic safety 60.0% (3) 40.0% (2) 0.0% (0) 5
Other 66.7% (2) 33.3% (1) 0.0% (0) 3
answered question 5
skipped question 4
Page 7
15. How are your inspector's results entered/recorded?
Response
Percent
Response
Count
Centralized database at office 66.7% 6
Manually (pen and paper) 0.0% 0
Handheld device (real time) 11.1% 1
Other 22.2% 2
Please specify 2
answered question 9
skipped question 0
16. Which of the following disciplines are entered into a centralized system?
Response
Percent
Response
Count
Building 100.0% 9
Plumbing 77.8% 7
Electrical 66.7% 6
Public Works 33.3% 3
Health 11.1% 1
Fire 33.3% 3
Other (please specify) 22.2% 2
answered question 9
skipped question 0
Page 8
17. How are the inspectors' time allocated weekly? (Please indicate number of hours)
Response
Average
Response
Total
Response
Count
Office hours 12.89 116 9
Field hours 23.13 185 8
Training hours 2.40 12 5
Other 0.00 0 0
answered question 9
skipped question 0
18. Do you require certification for inspectors through ICC, IAPMO, NEC, NFPA, etc?
Response
Percent
Response
Count
No 33.3% 3
Yes 66.7% 6
answered question 9
skipped question 0
19. Do you use a third party to provide inspection services?
Response
Percent
Response
Count
No 44.4% 4
Yes 55.6% 5
answered question 9
skipped question 0
Page 9
20. Do you offer enhanced inspections services at an additional fee?
Response
Percent
Response
Count
No 33.3% 3
Yes 66.7% 6
If yes, what are the fees? 5
answered question 9
skipped question 0
21. How do other departments such as Planning, Fire, Health, Public Works, etc. coordinate with Building Inspection staff?
Response
Count
8
answered question 8
skipped question 1
Page 10
December 2007 Page 160
Automation Subcommittee Benchmarking Survey - Sample Comments QUESTION 6: What type of permit tracking system do you have?
• Eden Inforum Gold. • POSSE/Computronix. • Tidemark. • PGMensys. • AMANDA (CSDC) A general purpose address based database.
QUESTION 21: What do you like most about your system?
• The documentation and interface with information pertaining to all permit related activities.
• Expandable. • Easy to track down all information about one building. • User friendly. • It is basically a big object oriented database and a workflow engine so it is very flexible. • Customized to our needs.
QUESTION 22: What do you like the least about your system?
• Difficult to customize. Difficult to develop new applications with vendor. • Too much information and the higher performance expectations on the part of the public • Vendor support is unreliable and the degree of flexibility makes administration and
maintenance complicated. • Not intuitive.
DBI BPR Automation Survey
1. Contact person for this survey
Response
Percent
Response
Count
Name 100.0% 11
Phone 100.0% 11
Fax 54.5% 6
Email 100.0% 11
answered question 11
skipped question 1
2. Do you have an automated permit tracking system?
Response
Percent
Response
Count
No 8.3% 1
Yes 91.7% 11
answered question 12
skipped question 0
3. If you have an automated system, how satisfied is your staff with this system?
Response
Percent
Response
Count
Highly satisfied 36.4% 4
Somewhat satisfied 63.6% 7
Not satisfied 0.0% 0
answered question 11
skipped question 1
Page 1
4. If you have an automated system, how satisfied are your customers with this system?
Response
Percent
Response
Count
Highly satisfied 40.0% 4
Somewhat satisfied 60.0% 6
Not satisfied 0.0% 0
answered question 10
skipped question 2
5. How would you rate your system?
Response
Percent
Response
Count
Very user friendly - Required little
training9.1% 1
Somewhat user friendly 81.8% 9
Not at all user friendly 9.1% 1
answered question 11
skipped question 1
Page 2
6. What type of permit tracking system do you have?
Response
Percent
Response
Count
In-house developed system 27.3% 3
Off-the-shelf system (Please
indicate software/vendor below)27.3% 3
Customized off-the-shelf system
(Please indicate software/vendor
below)
45.5% 5
Other 0.0% 0
Name of Software/Vendor 8
answered question 11
skipped question 1
7. How many months did it take to develop and fully implement?
Response
Count
9
answered question 9
skipped question 3
8. What was your approach to implementation?
Response
Percent
Response
Count
Phased 50.0% 4
Parallel deployment 25.0% 2
Big bang 25.0% 2
Other 0.0% 0
Other (please specify) 1
answered question 8
skipped question 4
Page 3
9. Does your automated system track the plan review and inspection functions/services for the following agencies? (Select all
that apply)
Response
Percent
Response
Count
Planning 72.7% 8
Redevelopment 45.5% 5
Public Works 63.6% 7
Health Department 27.3% 3
Fire Department 72.7% 8
Assessor 18.2% 2
School Districts 0.0% 0
Business License 18.2% 2
Public Utilities 18.2% 2
Our system is not integrated with
other agencies 0.0% 0
answered question 11
skipped question 1
10. Was any legacy data migrated into the current system?
Response
Percent
Response
Count
No 36.4% 4
Yes 63.6% 7
answered question 11
skipped question 1
Page 4
11. Which of the following services does your system provide? AND which of these services are available online? (Select all
that apply)
Automated Service Provided Automated Service Available OnlineResponse
Count
Permit Application 100.0% (10) 50.0% (5) 10
Permit Issuance 100.0% (10) 30.0% (3) 10
Permit Tracking Status 90.9% (10) 72.7% (8) 11
Project Tracking (multiple permits) 100.0% (10) 60.0% (6) 10
Electronic Plan Submittal 100.0% (2) 50.0% (1) 2
Inspection Scheduling 100.0% (7) 57.1% (4) 7
Inspection Result Entries 100.0% (8) 62.5% (5) 8
Fee Estimation 83.3% (5) 50.0% (3) 6
Payment of Fees 90.0% (9) 30.0% (3) 10
Complaint Tracking 100.0% (9) 33.3% (3) 9
Property Profile Information 100.0% (11) 63.6% (7) 11
Automated Workflow 100.0% (7) 42.9% (3) 7
Document Management Systems 100.0% (7) 42.9% (3) 7
Geographic Information Systems 100.0% (8) 62.5% (5) 8
Handheld Devices 100.0% (6) 16.7% (1) 6
Groupware/Collaboration (email,
calendar, contacts, etc.)100.0% (5) 40.0% (2) 5
Plan Review Comments and
Response100.0% (6) 50.0% (3) 6
Filing a Complaint 100.0% (5) 40.0% (2) 5
Address Management 100.0% (6) 33.3% (2) 6
Subdivision Tracking 100.0% (6) 33.3% (2) 6
Turn-around Time for Plan Review 100.0% (4) 100.0% (4) 4
answered question 11
skipped question 1
Page 5
12. If handheld devices are used by inspectors in the field, what type/brand are used?
Response
Count
7
answered question 7
skipped question 5
13. Do the handhelds have the ability to print corrections?
Response
Percent
Response
Count
No 30.0% 3
Yes 20.0% 2
Not applicable 50.0% 5
answered question 10
skipped question 2
14. How are the handhelds linked to the central system?
Response
Percent
Response
Count
Real time link 30.0% 3
Sync at office 20.0% 2
Not applicable 50.0% 5
answered question 10
skipped question 2
Page 6
15. Which of the following best describes how your system is supported? (Please check all that apply):
Response
Percent
Response
Count
Routine support/maintenance and
updates do not require vendor
assistance.
54.5% 6
System includes published APIs
and/or original source code.9.1% 1
Enhancements/custom changes to
application workflow can be
accomplished with in-house support
staff/programmers
63.6% 7
Basic system administration is
supported by in-house staff (i.e.
add/remove users, access rights,
etc.)
72.7% 8
System support is only provided by
vendor, consultants, manufacturer,
etc.
0.0% 0
answered question 11
skipped question 1
16. What kind of reporting system does your system provide? (Please check all that apply):
Response
Percent
Response
Count
Canned Reports 45.5% 5
Ad-hoc Reports 36.4% 4
Customizable Reports 100.0% 11
Other 0.0% 0
Other (please specify) 0
answered question 11
skipped question 1
Page 7
17. In regards to system security, does your system provide the following? (Please check all that apply):
Response
Percent
Response
Count
Audit records on transactions 30.0% 3
Control over user profiles and
access rights100.0% 10
answered question 10
skipped question 2
18. Does your system provide automated checks and balances for the following functions? (Please check all that apply):
Response
Percent
Response
Count
Plan Review is scheduled and
governed based on Service Level
Agreements (i.e. plan review is
based on set goals for turnaround
times with escalations to
management for projects not
meeting these goals.)
30.0% 3
Notifications/alerts to flag potential
concerns that need attention prior to
issuance of a permit (i.e. violations,
code enforcement activity, etc.).
60.0% 6
Validation of permit application
information (i.e. verification of
property details provided by
customer against a municipal
property information database).
80.0% 8
Automated verification of
construction valuation against a
standard calculation schedules
such as Marshall & Swifts.
10.0% 1
Quality control for plan review is
based on predefined requirements
and validation of completeness (i.e.
review clearances/approvals,
system tracked corrections, required
documents/reports, etc.) in order for
approvals and permit issuance.
40.0% 4
Automated fee calculation and
verification of payment collection 50.0% 5
Page 8
prior to permit issuance.
answered question 10
skipped question 2
19. How would you describe the reliability of your system?
Response
Percent
Response
Count
Bullet-proof with 99.999% uptime
and availability.10.0% 1
Manual failover to an off-site or
standby system with limited
downtime.
30.0% 3
Standard backup of data sorted
off-site with necessary downtime
for restoration.
60.0% 6
answered question 10
skipped question 2
20. What was the approximate cost associated with the system?
Response
Percent
Response
Count
Initial development and
implementation (hardware,
software, and staffing)
75.0% 3
Annual license fees 50.0% 2
Annual maintenance fees 50.0% 2
Annual training costs 25.0% 1
Annual customization costs
(Reports, Interface, Integration)25.0% 1
Disaster recovery equipment/media 25.0% 1
Other 25.0% 1
answered question 4
skipped question 8
Page 9
21. What do you like most about your system?
Response
Count
10
answered question 10
skipped question 2
22. What do you like the least about your system?
Response
Count
10
answered question 10
skipped question 2
Page 10
December 2007 Page 171
STAKEHOLDER SURVEYS
December 2007 Page 172
Plan Review and Permit Issuance Subcommittee Stakeholder Survey - Sample Comments QUESTION 43: What two things are you most satisfied with about the permitting process and why?
• The new process is much better than before. Sitting down with a plans examiner and then moving to other stations helps identify any potential issues that might inhibit the release of a permit.
• Some individual DBI plan checkers have been great to work with. For the most part, really enjoyed working with Planning, although design review process still seems a little unformed and unpredictable, the outcome is generally good.
• For most of the cities that I go to, San Francisco is the most consistent and organized as far as records and general information go. I also appreciate that I can see plan checkers for review almost all of the time instead of making appointments, scheduling my time into limited windows, or just submitting.
• That when you submit plans to planning that you can have them back once approved and complete project over the counter. That you have opened the fourth floor for easier over the counter plan-check.
• The new OTC permitting. Being able to go back to the same plan checker or, at least, have the next checker stay within the previous checker's comments. This is VERY big.
• Appointment of a director who actually wants to do something and follows up with action, sidelining of useless staff, etc. Individual staff are excellent, the process is ungodly complex and inscrutable, and variable despite over thirty years of experience working with the Department.
QUESTION 44: What two things are you least satisfied with about the permitting process and why?
• Turnaround time; the plan checker took months to respond to my plan revisions that were in response to his comments. As a result the project will not be able to start this year due to the start of the rainy season. Pre-application neighborhood meetings; the Planning Department is just passing the buck.
• Lack of consistent answers. • Lack of coordination between stations and the process never seems crystal clear. • There is no understandably written set of steps needed to get a permit, especially one
involving a Site Permit and its various Addenda. There should also be a companion list and set of steps required for the many auxiliary permits without which the Site Permit and its Addenda are almost worthless - such as Health, Elevator, Encroachments, water, sewer, Sidewalks, etc. Directions should reveal WHERE to apply for them and WHEN it is most appropriate. It should remind the applicant about the cost of each of those permits and perhaps an approximation of that cost. There should be reminders of permits or permissions needed from non governmental agencies such as PG&E without which a project, otherwise approved is dead in the water.
• The returning of plans to departments who have already signed-off when the change did not affect the first department. Reviewers should be given some discretion on what needs to be rechecked.
December 2007 Page 173
• Duplicate submittals to both DBI and the individual departments. The long delays between a permit being routed to a department and that department assigning a plan checker.
• Not enough personnel at CPB is the biggest problem. • Long review times for minor remodels of existing tenant improvements. Unpredictability
of the level of detail required on our plans and details. • Planning has become, more recently, more capricious. We have had at least two
experiences in recent years in which the staff Planner assigned to our project has virtually killed it, then another owner, at the same property, and with another Planner, got permission to do exactly what was denied by "our" Planner. 2. Inconsistency (as above). As an owner remodeling my own house, I was required by DPW to make the driveway in front of my house handicapped-accessible on an extremely steep hill--it would have been impossible, so we remodeled everything and left the driveway in its original state. Later we went back and rebuilt the driveway under a separate permit and the cost was almost three times what it would have cost had it been done as part of the original project. There was no benefit for the city, the public, or my household from such a rigid and unrealistic demand.
QUESTION 46: What two things from other jurisdictions would you recommend implementing into the City & County of San Francisco permit process?
• Clear communication to the customer. The plan checker at the intake counter should be able to locate a precise code answer when asked by the customer.
• As in Seattle, have an all-hands meeting for major projects, with Planning, DPW, DBI etc. all the same room, especially for city-funded projects.
• Eliminate duplicate permit application submittals. All applications should be submitted to one office, triaged at the counter, and then routed to ONLY the departments listed on the triage report. Trade permits (without plans) should be approved at the triage counter whenever possible. This same office should collect the fees for all of the departments who will participate in the review process. Teach MEA that they do not have to perform an environmental review in order to determine if a project qualifies for an exemption from environmental review under CEQA.
• Put more precise information online. Also enable the option to get permit online or via fax.
• The new system does it for me. The only exception is to get faster turn time on plans that have to "come in." Two to four weeks should be enough. Someone needs to expedite that. Some plans can take a short time but if that plan has to wait in line while something else is there that is long well that will plug the system
• A much better online program, the more that can happen online the better! Whatever building can do to make planning more accountable!
• Make available the checklists your people use to check plans. We could speed up the process by checking that we have documented each of the code items before we submit
• A single, coordinated review process by ALL required departments. One where the departments come together around a project, rather than a project having to "chase" the code officials around the building to obtain a permit.
DBI BPR Plan Review Stakeholder Survey
1. Contact person for this survey
Response
Percent
Response
Count
Name 100.0% 64
Phone 96.9% 62
Fax 65.6% 42
Email 87.5% 56
answered question 64
skipped question 5
2. When was your last visit to DBI?
Response
Percent
Response
Count
0-30 days 72.5% 50
1-3 months 7.2% 5
3-6 months 11.6% 8
More than 6 months 8.7% 6
answered question 69
skipped question 0
Page 1
3. Which Department or Station do you spend most of your time, when you are applying for a building permit? Please mark from
1-7, 1 being most of your time, 7 being the least.
1 2 3 4 5 6 7Rating
Average
Response
Count
Building65.5%
(38)
13.8%
(8)
5.2%
(3)
0.0%
(0)
3.4%
(2)
1.7%
(1)
10.3%
(6)2.09 58
Planning34.5%
(19)
20.0%
(11)
12.7%
(7)
3.6%
(2)
9.1%
(5)
9.1%
(5)
10.9%
(6)3.04 55
Public Works8.9%
(4)
4.4%
(2)
28.9%
(13)
17.8%
(8)
20.0%
(9)
4.4%
(2)
15.6%
(7)4.11 45
FIRE27.7%
(13)
14.9%
(7)
8.5%
(4)
21.3%
(10)
4.3%
(2)
6.4%
(3)
17.0%
(8)3.47 47
Health13.5%
(5)
5.4%
(2)
0.0%
(0)
5.4%
(2)
13.5%
(5)
16.2%
(6)
45.9%
(17)5.32 37
Redevelopment8.6%
(3)
5.7%
(2)
0.0%
(0)
0.0%
(0)
11.4%
(4)
14.3%
(5)
60.0%
(21)5.83 35
Other13.0%
(3)
4.3%
(1)
4.3%
(1)
13.0%
(3)
13.0%
(3)
13.0%
(3)
39.1%
(9)5.04 23
If Other, please specify 15
answered question 66
skipped question 3
Page 2
4. When you come through the front door, what was your experience with the DBI Public Information Counter? (Not Planning
Department-Planning Information Counter) Check all that apply.
Response
Percent
Response
Count
Generally knowledgable about the
process61.9% 39
Technically knowledgeable 30.2% 19
Helpful 49.2% 31
Courteous 49.2% 31
Easy to Understand 30.2% 19
Other 12.7% 8
Please specify 11
answered question 63
skipped question 6
5. Is it easy to find your way around the various stations and departments at 1660 Mission Street?
Response
Percent
Response
Count
Very easy 27.3% 18
Somewhat easy 50.0% 33
Not easy 22.7% 15
answered question 66
skipped question 3
Page 3
6. Is there duplication of review stations?
Response
Percent
Response
Count
No 62.5% 35
Yes 37.5% 21
Is this appropriate? Comment 15
answered question 56
skipped question 13
7. Is it easy to find your way to other agency locations (Planning Department at 1650 Mission Street, Public Works/BSM at
Stevenson Street, Fire Department, School District, SFRA/Mayor's Office of Housing?
Response
Percent
Response
Count
Very easy 29.2% 19
Somewhat easy 47.7% 31
Not easy 23.1% 15
answered question 65
skipped question 4
8. Have you used the Planning, Building, Public Works, Fire Departments for general information or customer service?
Response
Percent
Response
Count
No 30.3% 20
Yes 69.7% 46
answered question 66
skipped question 3
Page 4
9. If yes, have these experiences been satisfactory?
Response
Percent
Response
Count
I have not used Planning, Building,
Public Works, Fire Department for
general information or customer
service
5.3% 3
No 24.6% 14
Yes 70.2% 40
Please specify 16
answered question 57
skipped question 12
10. How would you rate the coordination between the Building Department and other approval agencies such as Planning,
Public Works, Fire ...?
Response
Percent
Response
Count
Excellent 9.2% 6
Good 40.0% 26
Fair 30.8% 20
Poor 20.0% 13
answered question 65
skipped question 4
11. Is there a consistency in information, where you get the same answers to the same question you ask others?
Response
Percent
Response
Count
Yes 35.9% 23
No 64.1% 41
answered question 64
skipped question 5
Page 5
12. Is it easy for you to fulfill the requirements for obtaining a certain construction permit? (ie, licenses required for certain
permits, such as plumbing, electrical, building; business tax registration, etc.)
Response
Percent
Response
Count
Very easy 35.5% 22
Somewhat easy 40.3% 25
Not easy 24.2% 15
answered question 62
skipped question 7
13. When obtaining a permit, do you hire a permit consultant or do you obtain the permit yourself?
Response
Percent
Response
Count
Hire a permit consultant 23.4% 15
Obtain the permit yourself 84.4% 54
answered question 64
skipped question 5
14. Building
No YesResponse
Count
At Office 20.0% (13) 80.0% (52) 65
On their website 55.0% (22) 45.0% (18) 40
answered question 66
skipped question 3
Page 6
15. Planning
No YesResponse
Count
At Office 28.3% (17) 71.7% (43) 60
On their website 72.2% (26) 27.8% (10) 36
answered question 61
skipped question 8
16. Public Works/BSM/Urban Forestry
No YesResponse
Count
At Office 40.0% (18) 60.0% (27) 45
On their website 74.1% (20) 25.9% (7) 27
answered question 45
skipped question 24
17. Redevelopment
No YesResponse
Count
At Office 44.8% (13) 55.2% (16) 29
On their website 68.4% (13) 31.6% (6) 19
answered question 30
skipped question 39
Page 7
18. Health
No YesResponse
Count
At Office 35.3% (12) 64.7% (22) 34
On their website 72.2% (13) 27.8% (5) 18
answered question 35
skipped question 34
19. Mayor's Office on Disability
No YesResponse
Count
At Office 45.2% (14) 54.8% (17) 31
On their website 63.2% (12) 36.8% (7) 19
answered question 34
skipped question 35
20. Do you think the permit/complaint tracking and other services on DBI's website is satisfactory?
Response
Percent
Response
Count
No 35.8% 19
Yes 64.2% 34
Comment 21
answered question 53
skipped question 16
Page 8
21. How often do you apply for permit applications?
Response
Percent
Response
Count
Greater than 1 per month 44.6% 29
Greater than 1 per 6 months 36.9% 24
Greater than 1 per year 18.5% 12
answered question 65
skipped question 4
22. Planning (after mandatory notification and hearing processes)
Response
Percent
Response
Count
Same day 13.3% 8
One day 11.7% 7
One week 58.3% 35
One month 15.0% 9
Six months 1.7% 1
One year 0.0% 0
answered question 60
skipped question 9
Page 9
23. Large Commercial Building/Remodel (not tenant improvements)
Response
Percent
Response
Count
Same day 0.0% 0
One day 8.9% 4
One week 33.3% 15
One month 40.0% 18
Six months 17.8% 8
answered question 45
skipped question 24
24. Small Commercial Building/Remodel (not tenant improvements)
Response
Percent
Response
Count
Same day 8.0% 4
One day 14.0% 7
One week 38.0% 19
One month 34.0% 17
Six months 6.0% 3
answered question 50
skipped question 19
Page 10
25. Large Residential Building/Remodel (4+ units)
Response
Percent
Response
Count
Same day 3.8% 2
One day 5.8% 3
One week 26.9% 14
One month 48.1% 25
Six months 15.4% 8
answered question 52
skipped question 17
26. Small Residential Building/Remodel (Less than 4 units)
Response
Percent
Response
Count
Same day 10.9% 6
One day 5.5% 3
One week 60.0% 33
One month 20.0% 11
Six months 3.6% 2
answered question 55
skipped question 14
27. Over the Counter
Response
Percent
Response
Count
One hour or less 59.7% 37
Four hours or less 40.3% 25
answered question 62
skipped question 7
Page 11
28. Public Works
Response
Percent
Response
Count
Same day 29.4% 15
One day 19.6% 10
One week 39.2% 20
One month 7.8% 4
Six months 3.9% 2
answered question 51
skipped question 18
29. Other
Response
Count
6
answered question 6
skipped question 63
Page 12
30. How accessible is your plan reviewer?
Very Somewhat Not accessibleResponse
Count
Building 29.8% (17) 57.9% (33) 12.3% (7) 57
Planning 28.3% (15) 62.3% (33) 9.4% (5) 53
Public Works 36.8% (14) 52.6% (20) 10.5% (4) 38
Fire 54.8% (23) 35.7% (15) 9.5% (4) 42
Redevelopment 25.9% (7) 59.3% (16) 14.8% (4) 27
Mayor's Office on Disability 29.6% (8) 59.3% (16) 11.1% (3) 27
Other (please specify) 4
answered question 59
skipped question 10
31. What is the quality level of your plan review?
Response
Percent
Response
Count
High 29.0% 18
Adequate 59.7% 37
Low 11.3% 7
answered question 62
skipped question 7
Page 13
32. If you received plan check comments, were they ... (Please check all that apply)
Response
Percent
Response
Count
Reasonable 52.5% 31
Understandable 54.2% 32
Helpful 22.0% 13
Legible 20.3% 12
Other 18.6% 11
Please specify 14
answered question 59
skipped question 10
33. Generally, how accessible is your plan reviewers' supervisor?
Response
Percent
Response
Count
Very 25.5% 13
Somewhat 56.9% 29
Not accessible 17.6% 9
answered question 51
skipped question 18
34. Are you concerned about retribution?
Response
Percent
Response
Count
No 67.2% 39
Yes 32.8% 19
Please specify 9
answered question 58
skipped question 11
Page 14
35. Are the code interpretations you receive consistent and satisfactory?
Response
Percent
Response
Count
Very 19.0% 12
Somewhat 65.1% 41
Not at all 15.9% 10
answered question 63
skipped question 6
36. Is there adequate coordination between the plan reviewer and the field inspectors?
Response
Percent
Response
Count
Very 16.7% 10
Somewhat 60.0% 36
Not at all 23.3% 14
answered question 60
skipped question 9
37. How do you wish to be notified that your permit has been approved and ready for issuance?
Response
Percent
Response
Count
By mail (postcard) 13.6% 8
By email 62.7% 37
By checking it online via website 16.9% 10
Other 6.8% 4
Comment 7
answered question 59
skipped question 10
Page 15
38. Are you satisfied with the payment process of your permit?
Response
Percent
Response
Count
Very 41.7% 25
Somewhat 43.3% 26
Not at all 15.0% 9
Comment 13
answered question 60
skipped question 9
39. Building
Response
Percent
Response
Count
No 31.0% 18
Yes 69.0% 40
Comment 11
answered question 58
skipped question 11
40. Planning
Response
Percent
Response
Count
No 49.1% 26
Yes 50.9% 27
Comment 7
answered question 53
skipped question 16
Page 16
41. Do you participate in any permit agency trainings and do you find them helpful?
Response
Percent
Response
Count
No 65.5% 36
Yes 34.5% 19
Comment 10
answered question 55
skipped question 14
42. What adjustments have you made to your work product to be successful in San Francisco versus other jurisdictions?
Response
Count
33
answered question 33
skipped question 36
43. What two things are you most satisfied with about the permitting process and why?
Response
Count
36
answered question 36
skipped question 33
44. What two things are you least satisfied with about the permitting process and why?
Response
Count
41
answered question 41
skipped question 28
Page 17
45. Is the City and County of San Francisco permit process overly bureaucratic? Please explain.
Response
Count
35
answered question 35
skipped question 34
46. What two things from other jurisdictions would you recommend implementing into the City & County of San Francisco
permit process?
Response
Count
30
answered question 30
skipped question 39
47. If available, would you pay for an express/premium process?
Response
Count
43
answered question 43
skipped question 26
Page 18
December 2007 Page 192
Inspection Subcommittee Stakeholder Survey - Sample Comments Question 16: What additional services would you like to see offered?
• Please check the/your complain database before issue a duplicate notice of violation. For ex. I received one complaint from HIS and the same complaint from PID. It wasted a lot of my time. It seems to me that your divisions (PID, HIS, etc...) are not communicating.
• A narrower window of time period of inspection; i.e., 1 or 2 hours in stead of 4 hours (AM/PM.) Waiting time is too long.
• Handheld real time communication between inspectors and inspection division. • Booking inspections online. • Access to updated records such as when the inspector was out, rough inspection notes,
temporary occupancy notes, etc. These would make it easier to research why permits are still open down the line.
Question 22: Technology - What type of technological improvement would you like to see?
• Complaint need to be updated more timely, say within 5 working days of the inspection. • Specific code and requirements should be posted online. With a homeowner's permit
and the horrible inconsistency of the inspectors, a user should be able to go online, see what exactly is required for their project, and therefore, have a reference point for disputes.
• Online scheduling of inspections and automated inspections request system - 24/7. • Computer monitoring - with "alarms" or other notices - that certain deadlines for work are
coming up. Stale permits that sit around LONG after theoretical expiration date (or for start of work under permit) are a BIG problem for neighbors/the public. There are way too many instances of a final inspection not happening FOR YEARS AND YEARS. This cheats the city out of re-assessment funds and makes it extremely difficult to track project status. There should be a "tickler" file that reports overdue status to both the individual inspector and "up the chain of command." It is really hard for an "outsider" to know what is going on. Stale information on status of work is a problem for the community and some owners. There should be the equivalent of computer tracking "alarm bells" built in. This could also benefit owners doing their own work who may not know they are responsible for getting their own work signed off.
• Central Permit should have a more advanced database that holds regular customers information, so that we and they have less manual input for each transaction.
Question 26: What changes would you recommend to improve the inspection process?
• Web accessible inspection time request similar to airline reservation on web. • Special Inspections. • Would love to see an easier paperwork process or less paper work required to have a
re-file on final inspections when the permit has expired. Having to go through the entire process again is slowing us down and costing us time.
DBI BPR Inspection Stakeholder Survey
1. What is your role when interacting with CCSF Department of Building Inspection - Inspection Services?
Response
Count
50
answered question 50
skipped question 2
2. How many times have you used our inspection services within the past year?
Response
Percent
Response
Count
One time 4.1% 2
Two to five times 18.4% 9
More than five 77.6% 38
answered question 49
skipped question 3
3. When was the last time you used our inspection services?
Response
Percent
Response
Count
Less than 30 days 72.0% 36
30 to 90 days 12.0% 6
90+ days 16.0% 8
answered question 50
skipped question 2
Page 1
4. What inspection disciplines have you used within the last year? Check all that apply.
Response
Percent
Response
Count
Building 77.6% 38
Electrical 77.6% 38
Plumbing 71.4% 35
Fire 51.0% 25
Health 14.3% 7
Public Works 36.7% 18
Other 8.2% 4
Please specify 8
answered question 49
skipped question 3
5. How satisfied are you with the inspection scheduling process?
Response
Percent
Response
Count
Satisfied 57.1% 28
Unsatisfied 24.5% 12
Not applicable 6.1% 3
Comment 12.2% 6
Please specify 18
answered question 49
skipped question 3
Page 2
6. How satisfied are you with the telephone contact with inspection staff?
Response
Percent
Response
Count
Satisfied 69.4% 34
Unsatisfied 22.4% 11
Not applicable 4.1% 2
Comment 4.1% 2
Please specify 12
answered question 49
skipped question 3
7. How satisfied are you with the quality and thoroughness of inspections?
Response
Percent
Response
Count
Satisfied 72.5% 37
Unsatisfied 11.8% 6
Not applicable 5.9% 3
Comment 9.8% 5
Please specify 6
answered question 51
skipped question 1
Page 3
8. How satisfied are you with the consistency among inspectors?
Response
Percent
Response
Count
Satisfied 51.0% 26
Unsatisfied 19.6% 10
Not applicable 9.8% 5
Comment 19.6% 10
Please specify 14
answered question 51
skipped question 1
9. How satisfied are you with the consistency between plan checkers and inspectors?
Response
Percent
Response
Count
Satisfied 54.0% 27
Unsatisfied 20.0% 10
Not applicable 14.0% 7
Comment 12.0% 6
Please specify 13
answered question 50
skipped question 2
Page 4
10. How satisfied are you with staff accomodating your requested inspection time?
Response
Percent
Response
Count
Satisfied 62.5% 30
Unsatisfied 16.7% 8
Not applicable 14.6% 7
Comment 6.3% 3
Please specify 13
answered question 48
skipped question 4
11. How satisfied are you with the coordination of other required inspections (ie., Fire, Health, DPW, etc.)
Response
Percent
Response
Count
Satisfied 51.1% 24
Unsatisfied 19.1% 9
Not Applicable 25.5% 12
Comment 4.3% 2
Please specify 10
answered question 47
skipped question 5
Page 5
12. How satisfied are you with the coordination with other DBI divisions (ie., Electrical, Plumbing, Housing, Building, etc.)
Response
Percent
Response
Count
Satisfied 55.1% 27
Unsatisfied 26.5% 13
Not applicable 14.3% 7
Comment 4.1% 2
Please specify 10
answered question 49
skipped question 3
13. How satisfied are you with the professionalism of the field inspector?
Response
Percent
Response
Count
Satisfied 61.7% 29
Unsatisfied 10.6% 5
Not applicable 17.0% 8
Comment 10.6% 5
Please specify 10
answered question 47
skipped question 5
Page 6
14. How satisfied are you with the professionalism of office staff?
Response
Percent
Response
Count
Satisfied 69.4% 34
Unsatisfied 14.3% 7
Not applicable 10.2% 5
Comment 6.1% 3
Other (please specify) 9
answered question 49
skipped question 3
15. Did you feel you had easy access to supervisory level staff for a second opinion or interpretations?
Response
Percent
Response
Count
No 22.5% 9
Yes 77.5% 31
answered question 40
skipped question 12
16. What additional services would you like to see offered?
Response
Count
24
answered question 24
skipped question 28
Page 7
17. Would you pay additional premium fee for enhanced services such as after/hour weekend inspections?
Response
Percent
Response
Count
No 26.7% 12
Yes 73.3% 33
answered question 45
skipped question 7
18. Are field inspection corrections adequately documented? Check all that apply.
Response
Percent
Response
Count
Accurate 51.4% 19
Legible 45.9% 17
Easy to understand 27.0% 10
Comprehensive 27.0% 10
Reasonable 56.8% 21
answered question 37
skipped question 15
19. Are you given adequate inspection timeslot for the scope of the inspection?
Response
Percent
Response
Count
No 7.1% 3
Yes 92.9% 39
answered question 42
skipped question 10
Page 8
20. Do you work with other jurisdictions?
Response
Percent
Response
Count
No 30.4% 14
Yes 69.6% 32
answered question 46
skipped question 6
21. If you answered "YES" to the question above, how does DBI Inspection Services compare with other jurisdictions you are
familiar with?
Response
Percent
Response
Count
Favorably 42.9% 15
Somewhat favorably 25.7% 9
Unfavorably 20.0% 7
Comment 11.4% 4
Please explain 12
answered question 35
skipped question 17
22. Technology: What type of technological improvement would you like to see?
Response
Count
23
answered question 23
skipped question 29
Page 9
23. Are you aware that you can apply for plumbing and electrical permits online?
Response
Percent
Response
Count
No 29.2% 14
Yes 70.8% 34
answered question 48
skipped question 4
24. Would you be willing to pay a premium fee for a guaranteed one hour window for your inspection?
Response
Percent
Response
Count
No 37.8% 17
Yes 62.2% 28
answered question 45
skipped question 7
25. Special Inspections Process How satisfied are you with the following areas:
Satisfied Unsatisfied Not applicableResponse
Count
Access to special inspection
requirements51.1% (23) 11.1% (5) 37.8% (17) 45
Access to status of special
inspections34.9% (15) 25.6% (11) 39.5% (17) 43
Sign off of special inspection items 42.2% (19) 22.2% (10) 35.6% (16) 45
answered question 46
skipped question 6
Page 10
26. What changes would you recommend to improve the inspection process?
Response
Count
22
answered question 22
skipped question 30
Page 11
December 2007 Page 204
Automation Subcommittee Stakeholder Survey - Sample Comments QUESTION 3: What other information do you need to be able to retrieve from the online system? • I would like to be able to see a listing of who the contractor is performing the work on a
project. Too often I would check a permit that has been pulled and very very frequently the permit would list that the contractor has not been selected by the home owner or developer- Why is this important to me? I would want to know if contractor is about to perform work on a project that he has a current license, and the license will be current in 12 months, I could also check the CSLB web site to make sure he has workers’ comp because if he does not have workers’ comp and has many workers on a project what other short cuts is s/he likely to take, if the building department does not have the information before the first permit is pulled at least try and up date your records after the first inspection. Thanks.
• Photographs of work in progress or at completion. Building Plans online. • Be able to tap into DBI property database. Apply for and track and obtain permits. Code
updates, interpretations, rulings. Online help/question answering with technical services, residential plan check. Appointments for pre-application reviews online.
• Plot map information, planning issues such as historical ratings of existing structures, etc. • Guidelines for new programs that DBI is rolling out, so that we can keep abreast of new
changes. • I need to be able to make changes to address and such. From time to time you get a
general contractor who provides you with the wrong address and it needs to be changed on the permit and as it stands you must come to the office for that. It is a loss of valuable time.
QUESTION 6: What features would you like an automated system to incorporate?
• Automatic email notification to applicants. • History, status and inspection record on any given permit. • Electronic filing of plans. • Detailed plan check comments for permit application processing and plan checker
contact info, with plan review stop tracking, complete permit history and planning zoning information combined in one place.
• E-mail between contractors and inspectors, to save time for tracking down answers to code requirements.
• Online applications, fee calculator, records and archives.
DBI BPR Automation Stakeholder Survey
1. Contact person for this survey
Response
Percent
Response
Count
Name 100.0% 41
Phone 95.1% 39
Fax 75.6% 31
Email 92.7% 38
answered question 41
skipped question 4
2. What types of web-based services would you use? (Check top five)
Response
Percent
Response
Count
Permit application 65.9% 27
Permit tracking status 73.2% 30
Project tracking (multiple permits) 39.0% 16
Electronic plan submittal 46.3% 19
Permit issuance 58.5% 24
Inspection scheduling 46.3% 19
Inspection result entries 34.1% 14
Special inspections 17.1% 7
Fee estimation 29.3% 12
Payment of fees 39.0% 16
Complaint tracking 36.6% 15
Property profile information 29.3% 12
Automated workflow 22.0% 9
Document management systems 24.4% 10
Geographic Information Systems 17.1% 7
Page 1
Collaboration/notification tools 24.4% 10
Plan check comments 41.5% 17
answered question 41
skipped question 4
3. What other information do you need to be able to retrieve from the online system?
Response
Count
21
answered question 21
skipped question 24
4. If you were offered enhanced web-based services, are you willing to pay an additional fee (automation surcharge)?
Response
Percent
Response
Count
No 40.5% 17
Yes 59.5% 25
answered question 42
skipped question 3
5. Have you utilized web-based services in other jurisdictions?
Response
Percent
Response
Count
No 71.4% 30
Yes 28.6% 12
If yes, where did you use it, and what did you like about it? 11
answered question 42
skipped question 3
Page 2
6. What features would you like an automated system to incorporate?
Response
Count
25
answered question 25
skipped question 20
Page 3
December 2007 Page 208
PARKING LOT ISSUES
December 2007 Page 209
PLAN REVIEW AND PERMIT ISSUANCE SUBCOMMITTEE All Plan Review and Permit Issuance Subcommittee parking lot issues were incorporated in the recommendations.
INSPECTION SUBCOMMITTEE • San Francisco Fire Department complaint system is different from DBI. • Complaint abatement process is inconsistent between Planning Department and DBI’s.
AUTOMATION SUBCOMMITTEE
• Funding for implementation of the automation and ongoing maintenance.
• Impact of change on all review agencies.
• Entitlement decisions made by the Planning Department are not available to others outside of the Planning Department.
December 2007 Page 210
PARTICIPANTS
December 2007 Page 211
EXECUTIVE STEERING COMMITTEE Jesse Blout, Deputy Chief of Staff, Mayor’s Office Isam Hasenin, P.E., C.B.O., Director, Department of Building Inspection Joanne Hayes-White, Chief, San Francisco Fire Department Ed Harrington, Controller, Controller’s Office Dean Macris, Director, Planning Department Fred Abadi, Director, Department of Public Works Rajiv Bhatia, Director, Department of Public Health John Schlesinger, American Institute of Architects, San Francisco Chapter John O’Connor, Residential Builders Association Tony Sanchez-Corea, A.R. Sanchez-Corea & Associates, Inc. Gabriel Metcalf, Executive Director, San Francisco Planning + Urban Research Association Larry Badiner, Zoning Administrator, Planning Department Bruce Bonacker, National Association of the Remodeling Industry Agnes Briones-Ubalde, Executive Director, Small Business Commission Gabriela Cardona, San Francisco Redevelopment Agency Leo Cassidy, Residential Builders Association Ken Cleveland, Building Owners and Managers Association Ken Cochrane, BCCI Construction Drake Gardner, Zone Design Michael Hamman, National Association of the Remodeling Industry Thomas Harvey, Captain, Bureau of Fire Prevention, San Francisco Fire Department Doug Hohbach, Hohbach-Lewin, Inc., Structural Engineers of Northern California Jonas Ionin, Senior Planner, Planning Department Alicia John-Baptiste, Chief Administrative Officer, Planning Department Andrea Jones, Vice President, BOSA Development Nilka Julio, Local 21 Simon Kwan, Kwan Design Architects Susan Leal, General Manager, San Francisco Public Utilities Commission Thomas Ma, San Francisco Redevelopment Agency Gary Massetani, Assistant Deputy Chief, San Francisco Fire Department William Mitchell, Captain, Bureau of Fire Prevention, San Francisco Fire Department Susan Mizner, Mayor’s Office on Disability Barbara Moy, Director, Department of Public Works/Bureau of Streets Use and Mapping Bill O’Brien, San Francisco Redevelopment Agency Margie O’Driscoll, American Institute of Architects Jes Pederson, Webcor Builders Marcia Rosen, Executive Director, San Francisco Redevelopment Agency Matt Ryan, Webcor Builders Rodrigo Santos, Santos and Urrutia, Inc. Michael Seville, Local 21 Lois Scott, Local 21 Barbara Schultheis, Fire Marshall, San Francisco Fire Department Suheil Shatara, Shatara Architects Inc. Aaron Sinel, Professional Property Managers Association Eric Thatcher, Webcor Builders Jim Whipple, Mayor’s Office on Disability David Williams, BCCI Construction
December 2007 Page 212
DEPARTMENT OF BUILDING INSPECTION STAFF Vivian Day, Manager, Permit Services Jeremy Hallisey, Assistant to the Director Ray Lui, Manager, Plan Review Services Sean McNulty, Manager, Inspection Services Dennis Carlin, Building Inspector, Building Inspection Division Jimmy Cheung, Building Inspector, Plan Review Services Joseph Duffy, Senior Building Inspector, Building Inspection Division Cora Ella, Executive Secretary, Director’s Office David Eng, Administrative Analyst, Housing Inspection Service Patty Herrera, Supervisor, Customer Service Division Laurence Kornfield, Chief Building Inspector, Technical Services Division Hema Nekkanti, Applications Supervisor, Management Information Systems Steve Panelli, Senior Plumbing Inspector, Plumbing Inspection Division Amy Schmitt, Training Coordinator, Administrative Services Division Ed Sweeney, Senior Building Inspector, Building Inspection Division William Strawn, Public Relations Officer Lauren Yim, Junior Management Assistant, Customer Service Division
December 2007 Page 213
SUBCOMITTEE CHAIRS AND FACILITATORS PLAN REVIEW AND PERMIT ISSUANCE
Chair: John Schlesinger, American Institute of Architects Co-Chair: Joe Duffy, Co-Chair, DBI Senior Building Inspector Facilitators: Department of Building Inspection Staff: Patty Herrera, Bill Strawn,
Lauren Yim, and Cora Ella INSPECTION SERVICES Chair: John O’Connor, Residential Builders Association Co-Chair: Steve Pannelli, DBI Senior Plumbing Inspector Facilitators: Department of Building Inspection Staff: Patty Herrera, Bill Strawn,
Lauren Yim, and Cora Ella AUTOMATION
Chair: Tony Sanchez-Corea, A.R. Sanchez-Corea & Associates, Inc. Co-Chairs: Neil Friedman, DBI Senior Building Inspector
Hema Nekkanti, DBI Development Supervisor Jimmy Cheung, DBI Building Inspector
Facilitators: Department of Building Inspection Staff: Ben Man, Amy Schmitt PERFORMANCE MEASURES Chair: Gabriel Metcaff, San Francisco Planning + Urban Research Association Co-Chair: Laurence Kornfield, DBI Chief Building Inspector Facilitator: Department of Building Inspection Staff: Patty Herrera, Lauren Yim, and
David Eng SUBCOMMITTEE PARTICIPANTS Blair Adams, Department of Telecommunications and Information Services Ron Allen, Department of Building Inspection Giovanni Aquino, San Francisco Public Utilities Commission Laura Arriola, San Francisco Public Utilities Commission Tara Bazile, Department of Building Inspection Jim Bedrick, Webcor Builders Fred Bianucci, Cupertino Electric, Inc. William Bigarani, San Francisco Fire Department Rosemary Bosque, Department of Building Inspection Charles Breidinger, Breidinger & Associates
December 2007 Page 214
Mike Brown, San Francisco Public Utilities Commission Jim Bruntz, Commercial International Builders Susan Bufka, Department of Building Inspection Alma Canindin, Department of Building Inspection Adora Canotal, Department of Building Inspection Dennis Carlin, Department of Building Inspection Howard Carlson, Cahill Contractors Joe Cassidy, Residential Builders Association/Centrix Builders Amaris Chan, Department of Building Inspection Carl Chan, Sure Engineers Jimmy Cheung, Department of Building Inspection Alton Chinn, Planning Department Penelope Clark, Coalition of San Francisco Neighborhoods Ken Cochrane, BCCI Construction Janet Crane, Freebairn-Smith & Crane Joe Cuff, San Francisco Fire Department Dennis Dang, Department of Building Inspection Vivian Day, Department of Building Inspection Fidel Del Rosario, Department of Building Inspection Art Dell, SOHA Engineers Ron Dicks, Department of Building Inspection Joe Duffy, Department of Building Inspection Brian Dusseault, San Francisco Municipal Transportation Agency David Eng, Department of Building Inspection Robert Farrow, Department of Building Inspection Jeffrey Feldman, Interior Architects Robert Feldman, Board of Appeals Donald Fields, San Francisco Fire Department Mary Fitzpatrick, Controller’s Office Neil Friedman, Department of Building Inspection Berhane Gaime, Department of Public Works-Bureau of Street Use & Mapping Gary Gee, American Institute of Architects Gilbert Ginn, Department of Building Inspection Dick Glumac, Dick Glumac Consulting Engineer David Green, Department of Building Inspection Matthew Greene, Department of Building Inspection Tony Grieco, Department of Building Inspection Chris Hall, Weather Shield Manufacturing, Inc. Jeremy Hallisey, Department of Building Inspection Joshua Hanna, Anka Property Group Jimi Harris, Pacific Gas & Electric Company Pamela Harris, Pamela Flander Harris Sole Property Neil Hart, Planning Department Tim Hart, DASSE Design, Inc. Janice Hayes, San Francisco Fire Department Jack Healey, Peacock Construction Mike Hennessy, Department of Building Inspection Patty Herrera, Department of Building Inspection Sue Hestor Henry Hinds, Department of Building Inspection Gary Ho, Department of Building Inspection
December 2007 Page 215
Karen Hurst, San Francisco Public Utilities Commission Carla Johnson, Department of Building Inspection Henry Karnilowicz, Occidental Express Priscilla Kartawidjaya, Department of Building Inspection Joe Katz, Innovative Windows John Kerley, Contractor Louise Kimbell, Department of Building Inspection Yvonne Ko, Planning Department Laurence Kornfield, Department of Building Inspection Alex Kwan, Department of Building Inspection Sam Kwong, Department of Telecommunications and Information Services Edmund Lai, Lai’s E & H Electric Jim Lazarus, San Francisco Chamber of Commerce Anita Lee, Department of Building Inspection Susan Leong, Department of Building Inspection Melissa Lerma, San Francisco Fire Department Mary Lew, San Francisco Public Utilities Commission Emily Lin, Department of Building Inspection Wilson Lo, Department of Building Inspection Daniel Lowrey, Department of Building Inspection Ray Lui, Department of Building Inspection Redmond Lyons, R Group, Inc. Jeffrey Ma, Department of Building Inspection Ben Man, Department of Building Inspection Dushyant Manmohan, AME. Inc. Sofia Mathews, San Francisco Fire Department Jim McCormick, Planning Department John McDowell, San Francisco Permits Brian McGee, McGee & McGee Dan McKenna, Department of Public Works K. McLelland, Cahill Contractors, Inc. Chris McMahon, McMahon Architects & Builders Rose McNulty, American Institute of Architects/Asian Neighborhood Design Sean McNulty, Department of Building Inspection Jesus Mora, San Francisco Fire Department Cheryl Muñoz, San Francisco Public Utilities Commission Danny Murtagh, Boston Properties Ephrem Naizghi, Department of Public Works/ Bureau of Street Use & Mapping Arleen Navarret, San Francisco Public Utilities Commission Jim Naylor, Citi Apartments Hema Nekkanti, Department of Building Inspection Kelvin Nguyen, Department of Building Inspection Bob Nibbi, Nibbi Brothers Robert Noelke, Professional Property Managers Association Eric Omokaro, Department of Building Inspection Paul Ortiz, Department of Building Inspection Patrick Otellini, A.R. Sanchez-Corea & Associates, Inc. Chuck Palley, Cahill Contractors Inc. Steve Panelli, Department of Building Inspection Paul Pedtke, Cahill Contractors, Inc. Bernie Poggetti, Capitol Electric
December 2007 Page 216
John Pollard, San Francisco Garage Company Lou Pons, Pacific Gas & Electric Company Robert Power, Department of Building Inspection Lou Ravano, General James Reed, Department of Building Inspection Joseph Ruiz, Rhapsody Painting & Environment Paul Sacamono, Department of Public Works/Bureau of Urban Forestry Scott Sanchez, Planning Department Peter Sapida, Department of Telecommunications and Information Services Amy Schmitt, Department of Building Inspection Andy Schreck, Webcor Builders Kevin Simons, Robert Poyas Landscaping Garland Simpson, Department of Building Inspection Brian Smith, Planning Department Skip Soskin, Huntsman Architectural Group Bill Spitzig, San Francisco Public Utilities Commission Tod Stephenson, San Francisco Fire Department Peg Stevenson, Controller’s Office Bill Strawn, Department of Building Inspection Andrew Stringer, Anka Property Group Tuti Suardana, Department of Building Inspection D.J. Sullivan, Department of Building Inspection Ed Sweeney, Department of Building Inspection Monica Szu-Whitney, San Francisco Public Utilities Commission Simon Tam, Department of Building Inspection Jeff Taner, Structural Engineers Association of Northern California Sylvia Thai, Department of Building Inspection Pat Tobin, Department of Parking and Traffic–Safety Patrol Alan Tokugawa, Department of Building Inspection Hanson Tom, Department of Building Inspection David Valle-Schwenk, Department of Parking and Traffic–Special Project/Street Use Tom Venizelos, Department of Building Inspection Marge Vizcarra, San Francisco Public Utilities Commission Peter Wade, Public Utilities Commission Christina Wang, Department of Building Inspection Kevin Westlye, Golden Gate Restaurant Association Alan Whiteside, Department of Building Inspection Alan Wilburn, Department of Public Works Richard Wilkins, Department of Building Inspection Daryl Williams, Department of Building Inspection Clifton Wong, Department of Public Works Kenny Wong, Department of Public Health-Environmental Health Section Robert Wong, Department of Building Inspection Willy Yau, Department of Building Inspection Lauren Yim, Department of Building Inspection Janet Yip, Department of Building Inspection Brett Young, Cahill Contractors, Inc. Lisa Yu Pan, Department of Building Inspection Gerald Zari, San Francisco Fire Department Howard Zee, Department of Building Inspection
December 2007 Page 217
AGENCIES/COMMUNITY GROUPS/LABOR
• American Institute of Architects (AIA) • Asian Neighborhood Design • Builders Owners and Managers Association (BOMA) • Committee on Jobs • Coalition of San Francisco Neighborhoods • Golden Gate Restaurant Association • Local 21 • National Association of Remodeling Institute • Professional Property Managers Association • Residential Builders Association (RBA) • Small Business Commission • San Francisco Planning & Urban Research (SPUR) • Structural Engineers of Northern California (SEONC)
CITY AGENCIES
• Mayor’s Office of Economic Development • Controller’s Office • Planning Department • San Francisco Fire Department (SFFD) • Department of Public Works (DPW) • Department of Public Health (DPH) • Mayor’s Office on Disability (MOD) • San Francisco Redevelopment Agency (SFRA) • San Francisco Public Utilities Commission (SFPUC) • Water Department • Municipal Transportation Agency (MTA) • Department of Telecommunications and Information Services (DTIS) • Board of Appeals (BPA) • Department of Parking and Traffic (DPT) • San Francisco Environment (SFE)
December 2007 Page 218
PHOTOGRAPHS
December 2007 Page 219
December 2007 Page 220
December 2007 Page 221
December 2007 Page 222
December 2007 Page 223
December 2007 Page 224
December 2007 Page 225