requirement city wide. and ask the planning division to handle that portion of planning staff recommendation and with the approved outreach. and the description to utilize funds from the art enrichment ordinance if i was correct in understanding the ordinance and rer not able to do that. and bond funds have to stay and be used on the bond project so we couldn't use them to manage the trust. and the administrative fee from the art enrichment projects is consumed be i the management of the projects alone. and lastly, i just wanted to state that we do agree with planning recommendations and to

stipulate the art organization or which cultural facility will receive the funds but instead that we development very specific criteria that might give special consideration to arts organizations or cultural facilities located in the vicinity of the building project. and thank you, commissioners, and thank you to director ram and kelly and anmarie. thanks for your consideration. president olague: thank you. >> you're welcome. >> thank you, president olague and commissioners. i served as the art task force that presented to you in 2006 and in that process we looked at the various programs and

specifically the 1% art on site program and made recommendations that i believe all of which are included in the recommendations and the amendments from the planning commission. and i want to applaud the planning department for actually getting the arms around this great program. back in 2006 when we asked to see the benefit of the program and we know what art we have and a program that supports our artists and supports the public in viewing of the art and to make that experience available. and the art task force strongly recommended expanding the program citywide and in the south and why they were not able

to have those experiences in their neighborhood and the addition of expanding beyond the c3 district and support a city wide program for any of the large-scale projects will help ebbing panhandle that areas and especially in residential allowing for the option of the contribution to create art spaces and for performance in the areas where there is large public space to have the not just art and the experience of art. and also this provides an opportunity to support existing organizations that need help with capital elevators up to the second floor performance space and those types of things that are important to making sure that the experience is one that

we can city wide appreciate. i think this is a great, great the primary recommendation and the experience of talking with the development and they are more than happy and it adds development to the neighborhoodses. and i actually think that we have it enough support for this in the arts community and citywide to go forward with the recommendation and let the board of supervisors get the input and make the necessary adjustments. thank you very much for the opportunity. president olague: thank you. next speaker. >> good afternoon.

we wholeheartedly support the art requirement for the downtown development in the present form. and that are necessary to divert funds to what would otherwise be in public art to achieve the certificate which is of great consequence to any project. and to encourage developers to purchase or commission their own art work for installation in the the areas and to activate the

public open space and the right conversation. we also agree with the department's analysis that the opportunity for developers there and with the money spent on public art and the 1% equated to $1.3 million and we actually spent $1.6 million. thank you. >> thank you. >> good afternoon, commissioner. i am here on behalf of several public art. and reaching out to us and specifically we believe that the secondary review and or the work

and private projects and the process as a whole has resulted from very high quality public art. and additional review by the arts commission seems like a solution in search of a problem. and i was hoping that you and the sponsor wills agree with the recommendation to eliminate it. and second, and as a way to enhance the building. and with allowing them to pay an in lieu fee should be an option rather than a requirement. president olague: thank you.

>> i am jonathan goldberg and i am representing san francisco beautiful. and the livability of san francisco and the high quality placement of art. and the public art requirement. and the oversight of the program with greater public access and additionally it grants more developers with the 1% art requirement. and the establishment of the art work trust will beautify the active uses there. and section 1409 is amended san francisco beautiful hopes the arts commission will continue to

involve partners and how to spend it and necessary art enhancements. thank you. president olague: thank you. >> good afternoon, commissioners. i am george williams. as a former member of the planning department staff i was involved in the development of the art work and the open space and i along with ava lieberman did an evaluation of the downtown privately owned accessible spaces and commonly referred to and i am concerned as drafted the proposed legislation will lessen the impact of the existing program in the downtown. and the art commission suffers from severe funding and the

administration of the public art works and other programs. and with existing program with no cost to the city and the private art works and art works that are enjoyed and will be enjoyed for years to come. however w the adoption of the changes recommended in the staff report, all of which i support, plus several additional changes, and the core of the existing program can be retained while broadening the type of art work to satisfy the 1% for art work requirement and to generate the funding needed. and locate on the ground floor be retained, but believe it should be expanded to require

art works in areas that are smaller than 3,000 square feet. as indicated in the slide shown in the staff presentation, there are many fine areas that are less than 3,000 square feet that enliven the downtown, are well used and greatly enhanced by art work integrated into the open space. i also believe the requirement should not be limited to those on the ground floor if open space which is visible from and accessible from the sidewalk with adequate signage are created in the future and should be required to include some art work. and the staff report recommends sponsors of residential buildings will allowed to provide on site art or make a fee payment for the trust. and they recommend the percentages now be prescribed. and i agree with the recommendation with one modification. >> i have one more sentence. >> i have your letter, so we can

always refer to that and call you back up for additional comment. and that was just the first bell. it is very confusing. they changed the bell on us. you still have 30 seconds. i'll give you 30 seconds. >> i agree with the recommendation with one limitation. i believe it's important to continue to require residential buildings you some portion of the required fund for art work at the ground level on or adjacent to the building. any surface or element of the building can successfully be turned into an art piece. how far, i believe it can be done at a cost less than the require 1d% and the unused portion can be paid to the art trust at the project sponsor's option. thank you. president olague: thank you. and just for the public's sake, there are two bells. the first bell is a 30-second reminder. that is all. they changed the bells. it's confusing sometimes.

>> not saved by the bell. hello, commissioners, directors, and i really am excited and encourage the adoption of the proposals put forward by the planning department. this is exciting to expand the program to other much-needed areas within the city and of the groups working on the related proposals at the western soma task force and i hope to see both itch implemented. and residential larger than 50 units and office development of 50,000 square feet and pedestrian levels design and ability. and follows san francisco planning code and products be applied toward the inclusion of publicly displayed art work. and for new developments, 150 thousands square feet and should be set aside for dedicated arts uses as defined in the zoning

code and 1% of total construction costs may be made to the neighborhood benefits project for arts-related spaces or public realm improvement. and just to show you there are other areas and groups considering expansion pangs of related ideas and to move forward on the citywide or eastern neighborhood basis. and i am concerned with the report that public art performance will be best enhanced by returning funding and the hotel fund redirected to the general fund and we have the funding there as the city would spend the money. so please do anything you can to encourage the funding to go where it was intended. and the 1% ideally goes to lasting changes as well. and perhaps go to funds of the stage or cultural facilities that the performances are encouraged and permitted to

inform on and the platforms and rotational temporary art in the corporate locations as well. and the return of the funding for the hotel tax fund to augment this. and re-evaluating which projects contribute. and section 429 with the plan for the c3 district and the respond to the dense neighborhood developments tempered with prop m growth regulations and i was unclear in reading the proposal about where new housing developments were going to be included in the fund and large-scale housing like rincon hill and are some of the examples of large scale projects that would be great to contribute to this. i would like to echo the previous speaker's feedback on the percentage since there's not as much popo space within the areas to be a greater contributor to the general art trust fund created here. and with the exception of the

nonpublic arts group, it would be best to maintain control of the funding. and there is a new fire station and please require them to pay the 2% public art fee. all the public wants to see that. president olague: thank you. is there any additional public comment? >> i have to open up one thing. i am brad paul and i became involve in arts policy and issues in the city in 1975 when i moved into the goodman building and that is a test for how many are old enough to remember where what the goodman building was and about affordable livable and workable space in the downtown. back in 2005 i was invited to the san francisco arts task force to talk about arts issues

and i was one of the people who talked about the need to change the 1% art requirement in many

well. and this is certainly something we would engage in days cushion about. we haven't at this point done the outreach to neighborhood groups and developers and the community, although i hear you loud and leclearly what the art community thinks about it and would want to go through that process before we amend the requirements. and to move on, in section two of the recommendations, this is,

again, through the data and some of the details as anmarie recalled the public process and the physical limitation and the 5% discount to agree that our office work through 2a, b, and c. and we were unclear and i appreciate the clarity now on recommendation three, which is removing the arts commission review. if the arts commission and planning staff have agreed on recommendation number three, then i think we would agree as well. we would like to note it and have the board consider that issue at land user to full board at some point just to note it, but we were unclear that that consensus had been reached and glad to hear that happened and if that consensus is reached, we would go along with that. i will allow cat to add anything. >> i don't have that much to add. i know jason summarized it, but supervisor chiu is open to the recommendation about expanding

this and he was very interested in what the planning commission has to sayn't an it and very interested in doing appropriate outreach if that is your direction. >> if you have any questions, we would be happy to answer. president olague: commissioner antonini. commissioner antonini: thank you for a very interesting presentation. i am pretty much on board with many of the things and the flexibility on how the 1% is spent is a good thing. and i think that the expanding of the requirement seems to be outreach or a lot of people spoken in favor of that. and of course, dictated by the size of the project as the project has to be a certain size for it to be required. i think maintenance is important. that part would go into the fund and could be used for maintenance and fine for using it for the dome and is beautiful