Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Building Safety topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
DBI drafts bulletin to expand geotechnical peer review for tall buildings
Summary
The Building Inspection Commission reviewed draft Administrative Bulletin AB 82, which would require extra geotechnical peer review for new buildings 240 feet or taller in designated liquefaction/soft‑soil zones and formalize DBI—s direct contracting with reviewers; the bulletin is under city‑attorney review.
The San Francisco Building Inspection Commission on Oct. 17 heard a presentation on Administrative Bulletin AB 82, a draft set of guidelines that would expand the Department of Building Inspection—s use of independent geotechnical and seismic peer review on tall‑building projects.
Dan Lowry, deputy director for permit services, told commissioners the bulletin would formalize a process in which the director can require one or more specialized reviewers to provide an independent technical opinion. "If the director determines that review is required, the director shall request one or more structural, geotechnical or seismic hazard reviewers" to examine scope items, Lowry said.
Lowry said the draft directs DBI to contract directly with peer reviewers rather than relying on reviewers hired through project sponsors. The bulletin would require reviewers to disclose potential conflicts in writing and to be registered professional engineers; qualified staff or academic reviewers may contribute under the responsibility of the registered engineer. The draft also proposes that new projects with buildings 240 feet or taller located in the city—s mapped liquefaction or soft‑soil zones "shall include two technical reviewers on the engineering design team unless the project will include piles drilled and anchored to bedrock," while projects anchored to bedrock would typically require only one geotechnical reviewer.
Tom Puig, DBI director, said the department has already been using many of these procedures and that the bulletin will make them formal after city‑attorney review. "As soon as they're complete with their review, we would formalize this administrative bulletin," Puig said.
Commissioners asked about timing and implementation. Lowry said AB 82 is still in draft form and is under city‑attorney review; staff have issued interim information sheets and are already applying extra geotechnical requirements in practice where appropriate. Commissioners also pressed on post‑construction monitoring. Puig said DBI plans a 10‑year settlement monitoring expectation for high‑rise projects to help surface long‑term performance issues.
The bulletin is intended to increase technical scrutiny on projects in geotechnically sensitive areas and to provide a clearer procurement and oversight model for independent reviewers. AB 82 remains in draft and will return to the department agenda after the city attorney completes its review.
