land use committee. on tuesday, the full board heard supervisor wiener's building code amendment. he introduced changes to this ordinance for efficiency dwelling units. this commission heard this ordinance on june 28. no recommendations were formally made. the modifications introduced tuesday include changing the ordinance said that it would only apply to new construction. they also modified to on strike the occupancy limit that we discussed your and our hearing and to put that back into the ordinance. they struck it, but now they are putting it back in. this is a provision that would allow units to house more than two people so long? an additional 100 square feet are provided for every occupy. without comment the item was continued until june 24 -- with

that, at the item was continued until june 24. the bid and is, i guess, on tuesday was that their work -- the big news, i guess, on tuesday was that there were four appeals. you'd be interested to know that the appeal for the district plan was dropped. the board went ahead and heard the eir because they wanted to take a certification action on it, which they did vote to certify unanimously. there was an appeal scheduled that has been moved to the end of the month. it was a 7.5-hour hearing. on a vote 10-1, the board found the eir to be adequate and complete. the elements of the appeal concerned different alternatives for the eir.

staff responded at the hearing by saying the eir did provide a regional range of alternatives, especially in deciding a hybrid alternative. staff also discussed the spillover from night lighting would not affect homes. the eir discussed consistency with respect to the physical and attacks on the environment. the appellant requested a continuance of the eir hearing until after the commission rules on the coastal permit. the city attorney's office advised that the ceqa appeal should be resolved. later in the evening, before midnight, there was one more appeal for 800 presidio. this is a project that is familiar to this commission.

foster care youth in a community center. the board heard to appeals on this project last year. by the same appellant raising the same questions. last year, the board considered appeals to the eir. the board upheld the eir. since last year's hearing, the appellant challenged these approvals before the superior court. the court found the city did not preapproved the project in violation of ceqa. the eir is adequate and the conditional use permit was appropriately issued by this body. the same questions about consistency with the general plan that you dealt with was raised by the appellant this week. they also raised questions with regard to the environmental

review. it was clear at that point that the board was having their patients tested with this appellant. [laughter] supervisor campos ask for a financial reimbursement of the city's time. we learned that this could not be done. the permit was issued unanimously. there were no new items introduced at the board meeting. the housing trust fund when before the rules committee yesterday. the mayor's office presented -- this is a proposed charter amendment. the housing trust fund combines new revenues and former redevelopment area funds and development stimulus to increase affordable housing production. the committee added three amendments to the proposal, some minor technical amendment as recommended by the city.

supervisor farrell proposed an amendment that would include first responders as eligible for the programs downpayment assistance. supervisor compost proposed an amendment that would give the board the ability to decide -- campos proposed an amendment that would give the board the ability to decide. you do have a formal presentation coming up on august 16. at this point, the charter amendment will be considered again by the rules committee next week. it could be amended some more, once they have settled on a final content. they will present that to you as an informational item. we will also be presenting the companion ordinance. that item will be before you for auction on august 16. that concludes a report of what

is happening. commissioner borden: if we could have a presentation center, i will not be your august 16. if he could get a memo to us just outlined the basic premise. it obviously has a lot of impact. two weeks ago, we had a case where people were saying was something related to what would be impacted by the trust fund. we had no context for evaluating that option. it would be useful if we had a little bit of information and background. i recognize the will not have the final version until august, but some context for degrade. >> it would be no problem to provide you with a legislative digest. that is a short summary. commissioner borden: 55 laguna, how was that back up for an appeal again? it has been a while.

>> that is an appeal -- the certificate of appropriateness. commissioner borden: i am not understanding how 800 presidio could have the same items and arguments appealed so many times. could you explain the process to me? >> your approval consisted of a pud and certification of the eir. those were all appealed after you issued them in 2011. those are two appeals. the board upheld those actions and those actions were challenged to the court. the court resolve that challenge and found that all city bodies had acted appropriately. the appeal this week was a dpw approval for the subdivision. when you had one parcel before,

they wanted to make it into one parcel containing the residential units and one parcel containing the community facility elements. that did not substantially change the project, but the appellant argued that the eir somehow -- there was information that would affect the eir. the subdivision would not be consistent with the general plan. commissioner borden: the appeal was based on the dpw action? but the arguments were planning arguments? >> planning does review that aspect of the subdivision. the other review we need to do is to make sure it is consistent with the general plan. commissioner borden: are there any additional -- >> they will continue the court challenge to the appeals court. there may be other things as

well. >> the building per cent? -- a building permit? commissioner borden: i am not going to say anything. >> these are not the attorneys i was commanding. [laughter] commissioner antonini: my question was very similar to what was raised by commissioner borden. there was mention of some kind of financial implications that the appellant would be responsible for. i would be interested in hearing about how that works. i think it might be a disincentive for these appeals that go on forever if there was some sort of mechanism within the law that allows some of the cost to be borne by the appellant. the right of appeal is a very important one. we do not want to abridge that in any way, but there is a point. i remember years ago, when i was

first on the commission, there was an appeal of the project and the project sponsor made changes in order to satisfy the appellants. because it was a changed project, the dr'ed a second time, or a third time. they did not even show up for the dr. commissioner sugaya: there was a memo in the press with regard to cpmc and the 1%. apparently, the memo -- it did exist, correct? >> i do not know. commissioner sugaya: there were some accounts that a memo existed with respect to the scenario where cpmc profits would be driven down close to the 1%. i was wondering if we did find

out whether the author thought of that idea or took it from me? if you recall, i did make the observation that perhaps because cpmc's profits and revenues go to sutter health, sutter health could drive down the cpmc profits to the point where they could be seen as insolvent. >> i will ask mr. rich. >> i will note that there was no board of appeals and there was no historic preservation decision. if we could move forward on your calendar to general public comment category. it has a 15-minute time limit. at this time, members of the public may address you two items of interest to the public.

with the exception of agenda items. agenda items may not be addressed during this category, but only at the time they are reached on calendar. for this category, each member of the public may address you for up to three minutes each. the entire category has a 15 minute time limit. >> i have a couple of speaker cards. [reading names] >> i am the founder and spokesmen for a grass-roots group that is been around 30 years. i hope to make a compelling case for an eir in and around the

memorial tower. the uninhabited lots within the urban jungle tend to become depositories. telegraph hill is no exception. i needed a national historic site. during the research, -- i made it to a national historic site. during that research, i got a geology degree at stake. i would like to conduct an amateur the ground water at steady -- groundwater steady at my expense. i think we could get some ideas on what kind of soldan's we are talking about. -- solvents we are talking about. i could make some initial things to convince you that an

eir is absolutely necessary up there. on a much greater concern, from 1934, my group insists must obtain museum status. this medium is a very absorbent and i have gone in there and i have noticed -- one thing i found on the second floor was a small container of carbon tetrachloride, which removes stains. it is illegal today and extremely toxic. i do not think they ever got the right to -- all these airborne things and waterborne things are

a great concern. i would d.c. chiu as a third -- i would be see chiu as a third generation san franciscan -- sooner or later, it will emerge as a national historical collection. it's not be maintained by our gardners. they have no idea how to treat a fine art. that is my issue. we need to know what is in that environment and what impact 30 years has done. >> thank you so much. >> good afternoon. i represent a small business holding company. i would like to thank

commissioner miguel. best of luck moving on. i appreciate your knowledge. i also wanted to share with you guys 3 rules followed by phil jackson, albert einstein, and maybe others. order from clutter, in difficulty lies opportunity. in order for us to put these rules and to place, we must have some long-term vision and some of preservation. overall projects, but our perspective and our environment. today in our paper, we have this photograph of our environment and the city we live-in. it is of walgreen's, our favorite place, some construction going on in the background. it is an article about how the bart station on 16th and

mission had a lot of bums there. if this is the case in our public spaces, i think we need to do a better job of preventing this from happening in some of our public spaces. we have seen this come up at 60 no one -- 1601 larkin. it is a beautiful church that has been overrun and dilapidated. i started working on a list of seven or eight better just in my neighborhood -- that are just in my neighborhood. 880 turk street. 546 still mourn -- fillmoore. 1601 larkin.

this is the church of christ in the tenderloin. every time i walk by there, there is either drug trafficking are people sleeping. i urge you guys to look around your own neighborhoods and find spots like these that we need to do a better job of preserving the architecture and adding some economic stability think about what we can do to continue to add value instead of letting this fallen to dilapidation. >> thank you. >> linda chapman. thank you, i think, for the most part. i really want to thank commissioner miguel. commissioner miguel can speak truth to power to a methodist bishop and a recognized.

i really appreciated that. commissioner antonini for bringing up the subject has been something that is unworkable and a project like this. when i went into the meeting for the public, as i arrived, there were talking about how many shifts of doormen. you have to have three or four between the weekend and what not. what does this cost b the hoa? on the eir, there are two ways

to look at it. maybe we still have to pursue that. we do not know the state of this building. we really need to know. they were saying, keeps the eir open. have the historic preservation commission look at it. we need to analyze that. a decision was made that makes sense. we have identified that there would be an impact that would be significant. there is an alternative, which is partial preservation and a housing project. it could be the one that this developer is proposing. or it could be a different kind altogether. i want to read a little communication that came in from one of the active methodist serious to be in that congregation.

i am glad things went so well thursday evening. i hope it goes well for the church, too. we tried for more than three years to help them with building plans. they were told that landmarking was not legal for a church. the whole umc should not be blamed, though. our conference has been more careful about how things are done because they did not want to end up in a similar situation. >> any further public comment on items not on this agenda? public comment is closed. >> we can move forward to your regular calendar. item #6 is public outreach and engagement.

>> good afternoon, commissioners. thank you for your time today. we are here to talk about the department public outreach and the engagement program. i and the communications manager for the planning department. i have six months under my belt and we are seeing progress already on the communications front. establishing an employee newsletter.

one of my functions is not to manage the implementation of this public outreach and engage the program. claudia joins me today and she is the one who spearheaded this initiative. as a planner, she saw the importance of improving communications within this department. this is one example of one of the many things she has done to spearhead this effort. she has done a phenomenal job. she has shown great leadership by getting this program off the ground, doing their research, and maintaining momentum. as an overview, and i will give you a quick refresher on what we have done in the past year. some highlights on our performance. we will talk about the program that we created based on the feedback. and what we intend to do in the following years. in order for us to move forward, we are asking the

commission to endorse our principles. this will serve as a foundation for this program and really help guide what it is that we're trying to do. i will pass it off to claudia right now. >> thank you. good afternoon, commissioners. we have the software here, so we will try to play with that. we are -- we were here in october and we are excited to come back to give you -- whoa, it skipped. by a lot. ok.

we are excited to give you an update. we were here in october to tell you what we have been doing in the area of public outreach engagement. for the benefit of the public and for the new commissioners, we wanted to remind you the background of this project. it is provided a push to get off the ground. this -- three things came together. we really want you to look at how you reach out and engage low-income communities, immigrant communities we like to see better represented and more engagement of those communities. there was also staff initiative. we had been wanting to improve our process for a long time because we had several challenging community meetings. we went to get more tools in our belts and do an assessment of what is working and what is not working.

our action plan was a series of operational recommendations to improve the process is and the department. one was them to how -- to look at how we communicate with the public. that provided momentum and we started to look at this more systematically. if i could have those slides, we got a grant from the davenport institute for public engagement. they provided us with financial and technical assistance to do the following. i am not sure why the projector is not working. what this grant is covering, and before we started -- let's improved how we reach out to communities. let's improve our communications. let's start with a baseline. what is our baseline?

let's get an assessment. we surveyed the community as well as staff. last october, we came to give you an update. now we have a report. we provided you with an executive summary and we also have copies for the public. the second component, we talked about getting more tools under our belt. we are creating some more guidelines. how to plan, implement, and evaluate public outreach and engagement. davenport is assisting us with that. we're providing extensive training. we have one that is going to come from davenport. they're holding it for staff. we're trained as planners, but we want to have the skills to be able to do this more effectively. on a point of why public outreach is important, one of the components -- the functions

of the department is to provide information about our services. we also engaged with achaemenids seat in an ongoing dialogue about the future development of the city -- we also engaged with the community in an ongoing dialogue about the future development of the city. decisions that are reached through a public process are more supportable, more informed, and more legitimate. there were four goals in your memo. they rarely guided the assessment and have been supported -- they really guided the assessment and have been supported by a senior management. this goal rally came from former commissioner olague