environmental practices. again, this is an as of rightmz? situation. it will be subject to a lot of scrutiny and a lot of public input and so i also have the cosponsorship of7 initially, there were some challenges to it i think based on thew impression that it was as of 8t)ht, which it isn't. enough, you know, areas where people do have the ability to weigh÷ so i think it's a good piece of legislation. supervisor. mr. starr. >> again, the commission votedjc 6-0 to approve. with aa&lcñ modification from -s

could happen so long$?)oí(j a lt merger assembly was not in the project. it's our understanding it was not included in the ordinance before you of the 12 automobile service stations located on 19th avenue[&[1v from lincoln avenue- only four meet the requirements identified in the proposed legislation. one is located on the corner of district, one located on the7çn@ corner of irving street within the inner sunset commercialp district, one on the corner of 19th andaz÷ taraval, and m2 zoning district, and one is located at the intersection of]b zoning. that concludes my presentation thank you. >> chair mar: i see no

questions. let's open this up for public- comment. is there anyone from the public that would like to speak?ç katy tang. >> i'm here to offer our legislation currently in this form. again as planning mentioned it wouldu&b stations on 19th avenue, two of which now-vk fall in ourg district after redistricting. we believe that this legislation will give residents andbbsi merchants in the area the ability to actually weigh in on whether they would like a car washúx$h,÷ not. as you know on the west side of we believe this legislation will be a great vehicle for them -- there will be the cu requirements if certain conditions are met that they can say yes ory> way back when, we had asked project sponsors to meet with our neighbors and+ associations so we appreciate that they did try to reach out. but given the fact thisr legislation wasn't in place back then the neighbors didn't have a

say as to whether -- or they opportunity for input. so with that, we do urge your support on this legislation. >> chair mar: thank+ ó@ you. i know that there's two car they're on geary boulevard. there's a shell station and a hand wash(ec so sunset has none at all. can i ask,b-fay ms. tang, are te four sites owned by smallerzu5 merchants? i'm just curious because i know that gas stations are having a hard time rightykt3v now with -d of clean air regulations, and many other cha!h!i)es. but are these larger stations, merchants? >> two of them are shell believe and two are chevrons the quair footage requirement but i believe they are family operated. thank you. so seeing no other questions,

let's open this up for public comment. isç]/[gñ there anyone else frome public that would like to speak? seeing none, public closed. supervisorçsñ9 olague. >> supervisor olague: no additional comments. >> chair mar: colleagues, can positive -- supervisor >> supervisor wiener: thank you. i'm supportive of this legislation. and i actually think it raises a hear that there are no car other side of town ?mch5

>> it would establish a citywide transportation sustainability fee which would apply to all net new development to fund transportation system improvements.

this is a test for the land use and environmental development. this is a test for the land use and environmental development.

>> with the exception being accessory uses to residential. it does not apply to residential, nor would it apply to accessory uses which are accessory to residential. in reviewing the proposed tidf rerecommend a grandfather period for most types of projects required to pay the fee under the updated tidf including nobl and pdr uses, including automotive services and wholesale services and equipment. it includes a grandfathering provision through calendar year 2013.

the tidf update as put forward is intended to be consistent with the proposed transportation sustainability program to the degree possible. urd the proposed tsp ordinance the tsp allocates 6% of transportation sustain ablth revenue for a credits program. the program would allow projects meeting certain criteria to pay a fee that's reduced or waived, the intention being to support other city's priorities and objectives by allowing waiver from the fee. currently, there are four types of projects which would be eligible for policy credits including small businesses, specifically defined as non-formula retail, occupying existing vacant space up to 5,000 square feet, projects built less than allowable in districts that establish parking maximums, affordable housing projects, and then small residential projects defined as projects of 20 units or less. and under the proposal credits

are allocated on a first come first serve basis. in reviewing tidf update ordinance the planning commission recommended a policy credits program. the proposed tidf would provide policy credit to small businesses and reduced parking developments. again the small business policy credit program would be applicable in cases where the small business non-formula retail using existing vacant space up to 5,000 square feet, because tidf does not apply to residential there was no residential component to the policy credits program. again, the credits would be allocated on first come first serve basis and consistent with the planning commission and small business commissions' recommendations projects would be eligible to receive up to 100% fee waiver under the policy program. so this table shows current tidf

rates, and rates allowable under the nexus study and that final column shows how much of a fee would be charged in order for the city to collect enough funding to offset new development on the transit system. in no case is the city proposing to charge 100% of the nexus. the maximum percentage charge is about 68%. you will see most rates are proposed increase modestly with the exception that pdr and museums are both proposed to decrease. this table provides an order of magnitude on nanel projected revenue under the tidf. because these revenue assumptions assume maximum development billedout in any given year they're largely overstated but what you can see from this is that the proposal to change the tidf rates would result in about 4% increase in projected revenue annually. and the final change under the

proposed tidf update is clarify rules of mta planning and dbi in enforcing the tidf. what's proposed is for projects issued building or site permit after july 2010, planning would assess the fee and dbi would collect and enforce the fee. for projects issued building or site permits before july 2010, either mta or dbi would do -- excuse me mta would do the assessment in both cases but either mta or dbi would do the enforcement in collection depending whether certificate of occupancy has been issued. if one has not, g goh would dbie collection. the difference is because prior to july 2010, the mta had full administrative authority over the tidf. in july 2010 ti tidf was

consolidated with other planning fees. however, there is a transition period that's required. so this would allow for an appropriate approach to different projects, depending where they are in the process. finally, the proposed tidf update would tie the future tidf -- of planning code 410 which establish requirements for reportin analyzing, and updating fees. and both i and ms. -- from mta are available for questions. thank you. >> chair mar: also have regina dick intri, director from the office of small business with us as well. supervisor wiener? so why don't we ask if -- actually, ms. bose or ms. -- did you have any remarks at all? >> good afternoon, chair mar,

supervisors. the small business commission heard this matter on june 11th, and it did -- its recommendation is to approve with recommendations, and our recommendation. one of the recommendations is in the current form of the legislation with a policy credit, which our office did work on with oawd in the transit sustainability project. so the small business commission's final recommendation would be to approve this piece of legislation. and we're pleased with the policy credit for small businesses. >> chair mar: thank you. ms. bose, did you have any remarks? >> thank you, supervisors. nothing more than what alicia said but i do want to reiterate we're very supportive of this because it's one of the ways we fund our system. so we do want you to approve

this. thank you. >> chair mar: thank you. now, let's open this up for public comment. is there anyone from the public that would like to speak? so three minutes max. thank you. >> good afternoon. my name is steve cookland, i'm a development consultant working with the client on a project in the bayview, which consists of wholesale storage, in combination with pdr incubator space. we filed an application for the project last year and we've been moving it through the process with some additional legislation. but the new tidf fee in the existing program, that is being modified, came as a bit of a shock to us. at the planning commission hearing, i made comments, and the commission approved -- or adopted recommendations to extend or provide a grandfather

provision for storage until the end of 2013. and i'm just here to reiterate our -- or express our satisfaction with the planning commission and hope that you adopt it with those recommendations. thank you. >> chair mar: thank you. is there anyone else that would like to speak? seeing none, public comment is closed. supervisor wiener. >> supervisor wiener: colleagues, this is, as mentioned, a required review and update and i believe that staff and stakeholders and the commission, various commissions involved, have done a very good job balancing all the various needs, and making sure that we have a rational system in place, in terms of transit impact development fees. so i would move that we forward this to the board with a

positive recommendation. >> chair mar: can we do this without objection, colleagues? thank you. thank you. ms. miller, please call our last item. >> alisa miller: item no. of, ordinance amending the park code to repeal subsection(b) demonstrating or soliciting in certain city parks while other events are in progress. >> chair mar: supervisor wiener. >> supervisor wiener: thank you. this legislation repeals section 74.8(d) of the parks code which is outdated. this section applies to permitted events in seven parks in our city and provides specified locations where protests may occur. the implication being that they cannot occur anywhere else in the park. in the 30 years since the board of supervisors adopted this section, the configuration of these parks have changed, in some cases quite dramatically. as a result, this section is not

only updated but it's difficult for park patrol and police officers to enforce it. for example, the section refers to a fountain in civic center that no longer exists, and it places a designated public assembly area for dolores park in the middle of the tennis courts, or what are now the tennis courts. this ordinance would delete these outdated provisions, and allow the city and rec and park to appropriately tailor any necessary time, place and manner restrictions on public assemblies in our parks on a case-by-case basis in accordance can the california and united states constitution. section 7.15 also allow the city and rec and park to protect permitted events in parks from unreasonable interference, if needed. so this section is not only outdated but frankly is super influences given the department

already has the tools it need to ensure free speech is allowed while avoiding interference with permitted events. so i ask for your support. >> chair mar: thank you. and i know we have alex randolph from the rec and park department here as well. but should we -- if there are no questions, should we just go to public comment? supervisor? okay. so i see no questions. let's open this up for public comment. is there anyone from the public that would like to speak? please come forward. >> good afternoon, supervisors. my name is karen slud, the executive director with the union square b.i.d. i'm here to speak in favor of this legislation. i do understand it is outdated, especially in the case of union square park. in addition it has been redesigned in the last 10 years. but my concern, i just want to make sure that it doesn't compromise existing permitted

events. when a private event puts significant money into those events, we sponsor a lot of those events, it's not always clear where it's permitted. there's a main stage, the east side, the west side, and sometimes we have multiple events happening at the same time. i want to make sure that those permitted areas are clear. >> chair mar: no. i appreciate that. i'm chairman, if i may respond. so this actually, i think, will improve the ability of rec and park to do that. of course this only applies to -- when there's a protest or an assembl assembly relating iny to that or at the same time as a permitted event. and this will give rec and park for flexibility in terms of determining okay the event is here so here's the appropriate area for a speech area or assembly area, as opposed to

this section which says this is the free speech area, not taking into account where the permitted event might be. so in my view it actually increases the department's flexibility in terms of managing that. >> great. thank you very much. >> supervisor wiener: yeah. >> chair mar: thank you. are there any other people from the public that would like to speak? public comment is closed. supervisor wiener. >> supervisor wiener: i move that we forward this item to the full board with positive recommendation. >> chair mar: thank you. can we do this without objection, colleagues? thank you. thank you. ms. miller, is there any other business before us? >> alisa miller: no, there are no further matters. >> chair mar: thank you, everyone. meeting adjourned.

there are so many ways that the internet provides real access to real people and resources and that's what we're try to go accomplish. >> i was interested in technology like video production. it's interesting, you get to create your own work and it reflects what you feel about saying things so it gives perspective on issues. >> we work really hard to develop very in depth content, but if they don't have a venue, they do not have a way to show

us, then this work is only staying here inside and nobody knows the brilliance and the amazing work that the students are doing. >> the term has changed over time from a very basic who has a computer and who doesn't have a computer to now who has access to the internet, especially high speed internet, as well as the skills and the knowledge to use those tools effectively. . >> the city is charged with coming up with digital inclusion. the department of telecommunications put together a 15 member san francisco tech connect task force. we want the digital inclusion program to make sure we address the needs of underserved vulnerable communities, not communities that are already very tech savvy. we are here to provide a, b and c to the seniors. a stands for access. b stands for basic skills and c

stands for content. and unless we have all three, the monolingual chinese seniors are never going to be able to use the computer or the internet. >> a lot of the barrier is knowledge. people don't know that these computers are available to them, plus they don't know what is useful. >> there are so many businesses in the bay area that are constantly retiring their computer equipment that's perfectly good for home use. computers and internet access are helping everybody in the community and people who don't have it can come to us to help with that. one of the biggest problems we see isn't whether people can get computers through programs like ours, but whether they can understand why they need a computer. really the biggest issue we are facing today is helping people understand the value of having a computer. >> immediately they would say can i afford a computer? i don't speak any english. how do i use it. then they will start to learn how to do email or how to go back to chinese newspaper to

read all the chinese newspaper. >> a lot of the barrier still is around lack of knowledge or confusion or intimidation and not having people in their peer network who use computers in their lives. >> the important thing i learned from caminos was to improve myself personally. when i first came to caminos, i didn't know anything about computers. the second thing is i have become -- i have made some great achievements as an individual in my family and in things of the world. >> it's a real issue of self-empowerment where new immigrant families are able to communicate with their families at home, able to receive news and information in their own home language, really become more and more connected with the world as well as connected even inside their local communities. >> if we value the diversity of