impact from them. so, you know, we apologize but i also do agree with staff recommendations. president miguel: commissioner moore? >> i appreciate the staff's thoughtful analysis and comments made by the commissioners. i think we all feel that this particular church and this growth needs support except the support does not come by us doing what which we really can't do. the recommendation to us comes from the law in anticipation of the development rules which govern the city. what i would suggest, and that is within support of what all commissioners are saying, to work with the supervisor, we find ourselves with access to church properties, vacant properties we're struggling with to maintain and there's no taker for one either remission them or use them for their intended purpose. i can only remember the church in my own neighbor, clay and larkin. very beautiful building.

that might be too far away but the city has many church properties which are underutilized or in the process of being abandonned. so i would look for everybody to help identify those properties and help this congregation to find an alternative location. >> absolutely. i think the testimony regarding the community itself was wonderful and greatly appreciated. my own congregation started out in shared space twice, and then bought a church building that congregation had left, which later proved too small and then took over a commercial space and redid it into our present congregation. so this is the natural progression that happens all the time. i appreciate the director's comments on checking with the

department prior to purchasing any properties . i was dismayed when i saw the fact that they purchased the property because i don't know if their architect was on board at that time but certainly any practicing architect in san francisco would have known of this problem. and i feel bad that they were not advised that this is a very, very major problem in the city. >> move to dace prove. >> second. >> move to disapprove. >> second. >> on the motion to disapprove, commissioner antonini, commissioner borden? >> aye. >> commissioner moore? >> aye. >> commissioner sugaya? aye. >> commissioner president miguel? >> aye. >> motion passes unanimously 6-0.

commissioners, we sort of have been jumping around today. we heard items 15, 16 and 17, which places us on item 18, case number 2010.0081, the summary of work plant request for authorization of t.m.a. as connects the continued transportation program services and authorization to provide resident appropriate placement

and training work plan. >> good afternoon. the item before you is a report and request from the championship management association of san francisco, tmasf connect to improve through 2006 through 2011 program summary and it's 2011 through 2021 proposed work plan pursuant to section 163. in addition, tmasf connects is requesting authorization be given satisfying section 164 by providing the resident placement and training program brokerage services. they have submitted to you a proposed employment work man from 2011 through 2016. tmasf connects is a private organization that represents over 50 downtown buildings subject to the requirements of transportation demand management. since 1989, tmasf connects ha provided its members a specialized set of commuter-related services that encourage alternative modes of

transportation to and from downtown san francisco. it has played an important role in upholding the city's transit first policy in the downtown plan by mitigating the impacts of increased traffic -- excuse me, increased office development and increased commuter traffic downtown. i pass up to you some supporting documentation to the status report and program plan to review and provide you with examples of their efforts. in fact, today is commuter appreciation day and they are actively involved in today's events. as part of an effort to mitigate regional traffic and transit-related impacts related to nonresident employment, planning code section 164 requires certain downtown buildings to also implement a local employment program designed to determine the number of -- and nature of jobs that will become available as a result of added downtown office development, to publicize to san francisco residents the availability of those jobs, to work with local schools and job training programs to create a

labor pool of san francisco residents qualified to obtain jobs created by the downtown office development. to work with employers in the building to encourage hiring of qualified san francisco residents and to carry out other activities determined by department of city planning or its designee to be reasonable and appropriate in meeting the purpose of this requirement. commissioners, your packets include two resolutions. the first would authorize tmasf to continue providing brokerage services pursuant to planning code section 163 for transportation management. the second would authorize tmasf to formally begin providing brokerage services pursuant to planning code section 164 for resident employment. the tmasf connects representatives are here with a brief presentation, and to respond to any questions. with that, i would like to introduce their executive director, kimberly martinson.

>> this you so much. it's nice to be here. jonas, thank you. this is nora, from our staff. we have about a 3 1/2-minute presentation but it's late and we have given you a great deal of documentation. would you prefer just to ask us some questions or tell me how you would like to proceed. >> i think your material is excellent. >> thank you. >> i think this is a wonderful program. it deals with things we deal with every week and it's exactly the focus we need as has been presented. you work on alternate commute methods other than individual cars for those who may be commuting from outside san francisco and you also are working with employers to employ san franciscoens, which, of course, will eliminate part of that problem.

and i think those are two of the biggest things we can do and certainly in your work, you may also deal with businesses and workers to convince them to both move to san francisco to make the situation even easierment so i think this is a wonderful program and, you know, we should hope that you can expand it to even more businesses. >> this you so much. i would like to reassure you maybe of one thing, the president does not accept public funding, has never accepted any and it will continue along that theme. which is hopefully a very good thing. and today's our 20th anniversary. we're celebrating our services have gone mobile. so we brought you all cell phone holders if you would like them and stuffed with chocolate if you have much more of an agenda. >> commissioner sue gaia? commissioner sugaya: this is more directed to staff. i don't know anything about this program. i don't know why. but looking through the material i was wondering, i would have

liked to have had the 1988 resolution, which sets forth the performance criteria for implementing 163, some other conditions. and the resolution of 1989, which would have given us some background on this whole thing. you don't have to go into the background tonight. but because then i have a question as to all of the material we've received comes from this organization, and there's no planning staff evaluation of whether this is meeting anybody's goals or not, independently of what we received from the group. is that -- unless i missed something? but if so, i have no in depth, you know -- so i can't form late an opinion as to whether it's been meeting its goals, not meeting its goals, whether we should move forward, you know,

how this whole thing got started in the first place. >> they're not necessarily set out as goals but rather as objectives. things that we desire to achieve and to encourage. i'm not sure tmasf connects can actually provide numbers of its impacts but certainly getting the word out there influences ridership and how people make their decisions. >> can i ask a followup question? the one thing i will say in the report it says they provideed annual reports as well as half year reporting and reference to stuff that they provide to the apartment in our information. and it's an annual report detailing progress, semiannual list of members in good standing, biannual members of surveys in the present summary findings and i didn't -- i'm

saying i am sure the staff sees it but i guess maybe if we can see when you get those reports, maybe they can just be put in our packets because i think there would be more knowledge within the commission about the one thing i have written down, which is it be interesting to see the annual reports. i know a lot of it has data -- current data but it means you're doing the reporting to the staff anyway. >> if i could, the point is well taken. we can get you that information. i realize it's not here for this vote. but in general and very broad strokes, my understanding is that the organization grew out of the downtown plant and recommendation of the plant, right? >> it did, yes. >> downtown traffic management system. so we will get you that background information. >> and i can just speak because i know kim from my days when i used to work at the chamber of commerce and i ran the championship commit write and she was always there and we worked a lot with them and they've done a lot in promoting the commute issues in the business community. so i happen to know -- and this is from years ago from working

with kim at the chamber and her steadfast precipitation in making sure member companies knew of their existence and were accessing the resources. so i do know that they're out there because of the years. >> thank you. we provided a web link too. at that weblink is the last two years, i believe, of our annual report, and our surveys that are conducted of commuter behavior conducted independently by a consultant and they provide the results of the survey of how people are traveling in our membership directly to city planning simultaneously with that. so we're not standing on the corner taking the poll and bringing the results back. it is very arm's length and city planning has always followed up on that and we always adhered to that. and also there are copies of the resolutions that started the program available at that link too.

thank you. >> commissioner antonini? commissioner antonini: kim, correct me if i'm wrong, but actually i was on the commission when you came before us last time, which i believe was around four years ago. i'm not sure of the exact time but at that time there was extensive paperwork and the resolutions began the program and whole history of what had gone on. i still have those someplace. but -- and so that's the materials as you mentioned. it is available online and i'm sure commissioners can get more background information on that. this is more of an interim report and reassertion of our interests. >> thank you. i would be happy to answer any questions you have at any time. we are here to serve everyone, so -- >> commissioner sue sue gaia, we can forward those resolutions to you. >> that would help. pardon me. i get suss experience when the entire board of directors is solely private industry and the advisory council is private

industry and i understand this is a private industry but it would seem if it's directed towards alleviating basically car traffic and encouraging transit and pedestrians and all of that stuff, that there could be some outside nonprofit-type people that could advise just as well. i'm thinking of people like tom and i'm interested to know why there isn't any kind of advisory seat for the m.t.a. >> we discussed that when the program was started 20 years ago. the budget for the entire program is less than half million dollars. it isn't something that has been of particular interest to many elected or appointed officials. there's been no barrier to their participation, but it's a very small, privately funded organization that works very

hard on these plans with the planning department staff and that is why there hasn't been that type of involvement to date. >> thank you. commissioner antonini? commissioner antonini: i think we mentioned this is all privately funded by the firms involved in it and any other firms that want to join. so it's a lot like a business improvement district so i think that is a good reason why they are the ones who are putting up the funds and they can find out the solutions and they're doing good work, regardless of who's involved with it. so it works for me. >> thank you very much. thank you. >> i will just say two things, one that kim always came to my meetings in the achamber as well as tom so people like tell are familiar with this organization, and i can't speak for him because he's not here but i guess the point is, the fact that there's nobody here in opposition and people who are really involved in transit really care about this stuff i think also speaks volumes. because if there was an issue with this organization, i know we would see people here.

>> thank you. >> commissioner moore? >> i believe that the majority of downtown buildings and developers are represented and somewhere along the line we have to extend the trust that the permit we make certain requirements that these people really tried to work with each other to deliver them and unless we hear otherwise, that there's a kind of a question on their perform earnings i'm sure somebody would be here to speak to that matter so i can really only trust and be sure the department would reveal if there are any questions. i do believe this particular case, if there's any possible gap, it is bridged. commissioner sugaya: what background piece of information then, is this a requirement of the downtown plan or some -- so there is a public responsibility here? >> they're codified sections 163, 164, 165, all adopted as

part of the downtown plan for office buildings. commissioner sugaya: actually, the list, commissioner, in the back has asterisk where's the work program is required by the permit of certain of the buildings. >> i think if i might add, when we decided to try and take on the work requirement issues, you can see most of our buildings were developed before the permit kicked in and yet all of those buildings are participating in it. so we're hopefully trying to really extend the region and intent of what you were trying to accomplish by making to make the program a little bigger than it was. we hope we can do that. >> thank you. >> thank you. >> is think any additional public comment on this? if not, public comment is closed. commissioner antonini? commissioner antonini: i vote to approve the management agency of

san francisco connects 26 to 29 program summary and authorize the 20 11 to 2021 commute work plan and adopt a resolution for the rising transportation management association connects 20 11-2016 resident employment work plan. >> second. president miguel: on that motion and second commissioner antonini? commissioner antonini: aye. >> commissioner sugaya? commissioner sugaya: no. >> and commissioner president miguel? president miguel: aye. >> so moved, those resolutions pass 5-1. for anyone who is interested, the giants just scored on a home run in the bottom of the fifth making it 1-0 at the top of the sixth. >> well done. >> next up commissioners is item

19, case 2010, .0683-t, amendment to the planning code section -- >> not yet, not yet. go ahead. sorry. announce the item. go ahead. >> amendments to the planning code section 420.1 to 420.5, visitation valley community facilities and infrastructure fee and fund. >> supervisor maxwell, who is the sponsor of this legislation, has asked for this to be continued until november 18th. her staff made a point of telling me that it was not because of the giants' game but because they wanted a little more time to discuss this with the community. >> does that -- sorry. >> i was going to move to continue. >> that's fine. i was just going to ask then should we retain these or can we toss them?

because there may be changes, right? >> i expect there will be changes. >> ok. thank you. >> so i'm going to move to continue item number 19 to november 18th, calendar permitting. >> pardon me. >> seconded. >> i have to ask for public comment, of which i see there is none. >> on the motion of second to continue item 19 to november 18, commissioner antonini? commissioner antonini: aye. >> commissioner moore? >> aye. >> commissioner sugaya:? >> aye. >> and commissioner president miguel: president miguel? president miguel: aye. >> so moved, commissioners, which places you on your last regular calendar item or items, case number or items 20-a, b and c, for case numbers 2007.1238

emtr and u, the better streets plan. >> good afternoon or good evening, commissioners. adam barrett from department staff. the agenda item today before you is the better streets plan and relates actions, you probably remember three weeks ago i gave an informational presentation about the better streets plan and at that time you initiated the general plan amendment relating to the plan. so there are three requested action items before you today relating to the better streets plan. the first motion to adopt the findings. second the resolution to adopt the general planning amendment and third is the resolution to recommend approval of the plans, better streets plan itself and to -- an amendment to the planning code and administrative code. and those last two correspond to the mayor's legislation that was introduced at the board of supervisors. there were two pieces of legislation introduced there. to give a brief r the

better streets plan presents a comprehensive set of citywide guidelines for the design of the pedestrian realm and all of the different functions and roles that it plays. the plan was developed with over 100 public communities at this point, monthly meetings with the community advisory committee over the last three years. we published the draft plan in 2008 and plan revisions in october of 2009 and the final draft this past july. staff prepared a mitigated negative declaration for the project, which is included in the packet for this item as attachment two. the n.n.d., the draft was published on july 28 and was available for public comment until august 17. the final was published on september 18. that relates to the first item before you, the ceqa findings. the process to legislate and adopt a better streets plan has already been initiated.

on september 21, the mayor introduced an ordinance, actually two ordinances at the board of supervisors, one that would amend the administrative code, planning code, public works code relating to the better streets plan and the other relating to amending the general plan. and subsequently at the hearing here at the planning commission on october 7, you voted to initial the general plan amendment. so to go a little more into the three items before you today, the first item is a motion to adopt ceqa findings including the mitigation monitoring and reporting program, the mmrp, which is shown in attachment three and per exhibit a of that draft motion to adopt ceqa findings which is attachment four, you would incorporate the measures into the better streets plan itself such that future projects will be required to implement these mitigation measures as a requirement of their approval

and therefore ensure that the plan doesn't have significant impact so they would be mitigated to a less than significant level. the second item is the resolution to adopt general plan amendments. as mentioned, you initiated these amendments on october 7. the proposed amendments would incorporate the better streets plan into the urban design and transportation elements of the general plan and would make these elements consistent with the best practices in pedestrian and streetscape design that are in the better streets plan and would be reflected in the general plan. these are shown in attachment five and six. in attachment seven is a draft resolution to adopt the planning, the general plan amendments including general plan consistency findings and planning code findings. the last item, the third item is a resolution to approve the better streets plan itself and adopt planning code and administrative code amendments.

just briefly, the ordinance introduced had planning code administrative code, public works code and subdivision code amendments. planning code amendments are brought to you as well as administrative code amendments that have to do with land use issues and that's also before you today. the proposed planning code amendments would establish consistent requirements for street improvements associated with private development. the code is scattered in a number of different sections in the planning code and we have put it all into one section. and the proposed administrative code amendments would amend the existing better streets policy, which is chapter 98.1 of the administrative code, which called for all of the agencies to work together to improve the streets for all of the different functions that streets should play and the amendment would incorporate the better streets plan by reference into the better streets policy and would require that all projects in

the public right-of-way conform with the policies and guidelines of the better streets plan. a summary of these amendments was included in your packet as attachment one. if you have more questions on that, i'd be happy to answer. the draft ordinance the third item before you is included as attachment eight in the resolution and attachment nine. staff is recommending approval of all of these items and i'm happy to answer any questions that you have. president miguel: thank you. is there any public comment on this item? if not, public comment is closed. commissioner sugaya. commissioner sugaya: well, i'm looking forward to adding another couple hundred pages to my zoning quota here in a couple of months when i get the little pact. >> i would say i did add it up actually and there is a lot of text deleted. it does add texas, not a considerable amount because there is a lot that is deleted

from other sections. >> my direction to staff to make sure that we're not unduly adding to the code. >> as long as it still fits in one binder. >> i would like to thank adam and to reflect the fact that the reason that no one is here is because there is so much agreement on this plan, so thank you for all of your great work. not that there is no one here but the three members who are clearly here for a reason, but that's ok. president miguel: commissioner moore. commissioner moore: two reasons why i strongly support all three recommendations in front of us. one, the department now exclusively prints on recycled, noticeably recycled paper and double-sided, and two, because i'm an extremely support for this long overdue street improvement plan. president miguel: commissioner olague. vice president olague: i just wanted to thank, how do you pronounce your last name?

>> varat. vice president olague: i want to thank you for your work. you have worked on a lot of these issues including eastern neighborhoods. you were one of the first persons to work on that even before i was on the commission, you were working on that i want to thank you for all of your good work, i support this. >> thank you. president miguel: i think the director's comment says it all. any time we have something of this really massive import for the city before us, and it really is, i'm not sure everyone out there understands it, and no one is here to complain, that means you have done an unusually complete job. it's greatly appreciated. commissioner olague. vice president olague: i would like to make a motion, i don't know how we do this, separately or -- >> we can take them all together.

vice president olague: so i move item 20 a, 20 b, and 20 c. >> second. >> on that motion for items 20 a, b, and c, commissioner antonini. commissioner antonini: aye. >> commissioner aboard. commissioner borden: aye. >> commissioner sugaya, commission olague, commissioner miguel. aye. >> those are adopted and approved. commissioners, that's the end of our regular calendar. we do have public comment. i do not have any speaker cards, but at this time any member of the public may address the commission on items of interest to the public that are within the subject matter jurisdiction matter of the commission except commission tells. >> my name is daniel. we're planning students at u.c. berkeley and we're just observing the meeting. observing the meeting. president miguel: welc