>> okay. this is the regular meeting of the san francisco planning commission for thursday, october 18, 2012. before i take roll i'd like to remind all of us to turn off or silence our cell phones. this is a pretty crowded room. and as such i need to have everybody find a seat or need to find overflow. we should not have stand intion this room during the hearing. also because it's crowded, i know everybody knows everybody and you want to get to into conversations with your friends, et cetera, but that is not allowed. if you feel the need to engage in secondary discussions, we ask that you take those

discussions outside as they become extremely disruptive to the process. thank you. roll call. commissioner kathrin moore? >> here. >> commissioner sugaya? >> here: here. >> commissioner antonini? >> here. >> thank you, we have a full commission today. commissioners, at the time of the printing of this calendar there were no items proposed for continuance and i'm happy to say that there are still no items being proposed for continuance. the first category on calendar is the consent calendar. item 1 and 2 makeup the consent calendar. those items are considered to be routine. could you take your equipment outside or turn it off? thank you. there will be -- these items will be acted on by a single roll call vote of the commission. there will be no separate discussion of these items unless a member of the

commission, the public or staff so request. in that event, the matter or matters will be removed from consent and considered as a separate item at this or a future hearing. i have been informed by a member of the public that item 1 will be pulled from consent. but just for the record, i'll read them both. item 1 is case no. 2012.109 7c for 201 folsom street (a.k.a. 314 main street) as conditional use authorization to modify the performance period condition of motion no. 166 07 230er case no. 2000.107 3c to extend the period one year from the date of expiration of the previous extension of a mixed use project consisting of two residential towers of height of 350 and 400 feet above an 80-foot podium up to 725 dwelling units, 750 off-street parking spaceses and 38,000 square feet of commercial space. item 2 is case no. 2012.05 43 t

an intent to initiate department planning code amendment [speaker not understood] in the planning code. you will consider a resolution of intent to initiate amendments to the planning code. the amendments are inteded to 1, correct clerical errors in text, 2, revise existing graphics to be consistent with the existing text. 3, amend various zoning control tables. 4, planning code read ability and 5, adopt findings including findings under the california environmental quality act. planning code section 302, findings and finding of consistency with the general plan and planning code section 101.1. commissioners, as i've mentioned, item 1 has been pulled from consent. and if it's okay with the president, we'll move that item to the first item on the regular calendar. so, before you, commissioners, following public comment on item 2 which will automatically remove it from the consent calendar, the item is before

you for your consideration. >> is there any public comment on item number 2 of the consent calendar? seeing none, commissioner sugaya. >> i'll move to initiate, but i have a question. should we keep this material? >> for item -- >> 2. >> yes. >> okay. >> second. >> thank you, commissioners. the motion on the floor is for approval of initiation of item 2. on that motion, commissioner antonini? >> aye. >> commoditier? >> aye. >> commissioner? >> aye. >> thank you, commissioners, that's a unanimous vote for initiate. commissioners, we are now at commission matter. item number 3 is consideration of adoptions and draft minutes for your regular meeting of

september 6, september 13, september 20th, also a special meeting of september 20th, a regular meeting of september 27th and a regular meeting of october 4th. for the draft minutes of october 4th, i would request that a -- or a correction, actually, that we spell [speaker not understood] name correct. one l in each case. >> is there any public comment on the draft minutes? seeing none, commissioner borden. >> i also had some edits. i'll give those to you in written form and move to approve the minutes as edited, amended. >> thank you. >> second. >> commissioners, there is a motion to approve the draft minutes with corrections and edits [speaker not understood] commission secretary by

commoditier. on that motion, commissioner antonini? >> aye. >> commoditier? >> aye. >> commissioner hillis? >> aye. >> commissioner moore? >> aye. >> commissioner sugaya? >> aye. >> commissioner wu? >> aye. >> commissioner fong? >> aye. >> thank you, commissioners. that passed unanimously. are there any other commission matters? >> commissioner borden. >> today is california west coast shake out which is a create awareness around earthquake preparedness. it happened at 10:18 a.m. and 9 million californians participated. the whole idea was to stop, drop and cover. basically in the case of a disaster you need to get under a sturdy piece of furniture or doorway. preferably under a piece of furniture if things are falling. i also wanted the public to know that the red cross launched an earthquake act available on both iphone and android. you can download the plan, send it to your family members, store your information, find where shelters are in your

community. you can get notifications when there are earthquakes in various places. you have the apps to click a button to say i'm okay. so, if there is an earthquake you're feeling members can find out about it. i wanted to make sure the public was aware this resource exist and had was thinking about preparedness since we live in the earthquake zone. >> could you please name the app so people know? >> it's called the earthquake app and look under red cross earthquake app. >> thank you. commissioner antonini. >> thank you. a few things. number one, just acknowledging that the american dental association is meeting in san francisco beginning today through sunday and it's a large convention and we're happy to have it and we're one of a rotation of three or four cities that is able to host that throughout the country. secondly, the secretary search subcommittee met last week and will meet again this coming wednesday on the 24th to move

forward, and we will, you know, discuss that when we can. the body as a whole, it's actually going to be calendar in the future if i'm not mistaken en. >> it's actually following this item. >> it is on the calendar, great. and thirdly, i always wonder why we've been so fortunate in san francisco to be the origin of so many innovative projects, inventions, concepts and businesses. everywhere you go, you see things that were invented here. you see businesses that began here worldwide, not in the region, but specifically in the 49 square miles of san francisco. and, of course, you know, obviously at the beginning of port, the advantage of having the bay was the first factor. but i also think that one other advantage we have is our weather. and although everyone loves today's weather out there, i think if you have to do things

in this heat and have to go long distances, it sort of may discourage your creativity. so, we're kind of blessed with, you know, a milder climate that make you feel like doing things and that may be another reason. and we also have generally, at least in the downtown area, fairly flat area from which to communicate with one another. and there's a book called "the importance of cities" and the author was noted as saying large dense cities influence productivity. and, you know, utilization of creative -- the utilization of the creative sectors in particular. and he also says that the denseness results in knowledge spillovers which, you know, is one reason why one business attracts another close to it. and everybody talks about iphones and electronic communicationses, but a lot of the spillover is still word of mouth, especially the more

sensitive parts of it that, you know, can't be traced. if it's just a conversation, so, that's another reason maybe why businesses bunch together in areas where they're close to each other physically. so, interesting reading, and i found that to be quite interesting. >> commissioner moore. >> i have asked the director, actually, to give this securities and exchange commission and the public an update on an e-mail i received yesterday regarding the festival which is supposed to take place this week on urban prototyping. i could not even actually capture the abbreviation up, but i don't want to speak, but have him speak to explain it to us. >> any other commissioner comments? >> thank you. commissioners, if we can move

on to item number 5, we are still under commission matters. we should have an update -- commissioner antonini has given you an update. so, the commission can actually engage in discussion of the commission secretary search process. just as commissioner antonini has stated and commissioner moore and commoditier can chime in, we are still at somewhat of an impasse on the classification issue. since that meeting last wednesday, commissioner, who is the vice-chair of the subcommittees has spoken with dhr who would like to try to resolve this. so, he has asked for a meeting with the officers of the joint subcommittee and myself. we are trying to set that up for next wednesday, which would

-- as we do that, we will actually cancel the subcommittee meeting and have the meeting with dhr. also, alicia john-baptiste has found out some process information. she has found out that to appeal the decision of dhr, we have to have an official finding from dhr. we have not had that yet. we've had the letter from ted and his staff, but we haven't had anything from the director, and that's the only thing that can be appealed, not the findings, not that has come from staff so far. so, hopefully the meeting, if we are lucky enough to set this up, the meeting next week will result in something that's final from dhr. we can either accept it or appeal it and we, of course, will keep you informed on that process. >> okay, thank you. commoditier. >> yes, you know, what i wanted

to point from you out from ms. john-baptiste's letter, it basically states the appeals process is estimate today take 2 to 3 months and then we'll have to -- after that's done then we can post the position. but, you know, i think one of the discussions we wanted to have with the commission, we felt like it was very important, the joint commission thought that it was important to pursue the classification that we thought was appropriate for the commission secretary position given the amount of work load and bearing two commissionsment. we've been told there is no way to hire someone on an interim basis and the staff has talked about an interim fix. so, maybe we should have the director talk a little about what those are. but the reality is that it's going to be -- if their process is going to take 2 to 3 months, we're going to post the position probably for six weeks and we are probably looking at six months before we would hire a permanent commission secretary. >> i do have a question on that. why would we post the position for six weeks, why so long?

>> we can do it for a month. i thought we had six weeks before. even for a month, it would take us still probably at least two months to go through that process. so, i mean, at best we could maybe do this four months, but i don't see us being faster than probably -- i mean, that could be the fastest. but we're still probably looking at four to six months out just being realistic unless things go really quickly something we're not anticipating. >> commissioner antonini. >> yeah, i think that one of the reasons, without getting into details which we cannot discuss specifically, but this whole classification issue, we're just really interested in hearing from the public also on your feelings. and i think you all acknowledge the immense it of the job that secretary avery does and the job is getting bigger all the time. and this is kind of what i think has to be the uniqueness of it is something that we're striving to in dealing with

dhr, to emphasize that it's not like any other position that's analogous to it that exists in the city because it is so unique. we certainly would welcome comments and questions from the public to both the subcommittee, to the commission as a whole, to dhr, whoever you feel it's appropriate to comment on what you've seen because many of you are here week in and week out and you see what the secretary does and how difficult it is. appreciate that. >> commissioner moore. >> this subcommittee was put together in june and we have met every two weeks since to indeed do the due diligence and create a process which is indeed commensurate with the importance of what we are to do, which is basically in the public's interest, find a replacement for an extraordinary commission secretary, ms. linda avery. the letter which came in this

morning at 10:52 a.m. raises a number of very important questions, which i have to admit are unexpected. i do not understand their full implications because this is not what we normally do. and exactly how it overlays over new time frame is not clear to me. nor did i know the procedural glitch that, indeed, it would have to be appealed based on some letter we were to receive. i think we are ali equally unfamiliar with those particular moves, but i think it will take another hopefully quick discussion for us to simply understand what that means. and i hope that there will be tools by which we can indeed properly craft an interim position should this drag itself out for an additional

six months. i'm not a person who is deeply knowledgeable of all propositions, but i do recall generically that there is a proposition f under which exists the possibility to fill position in the interim by the person who vacated the position. and there is a time frame and specific particular terms, but i would seek guidance for being able to perhaps invoke that particular possibility under prop f. >> commissioner sugaya. >> yes, i'm not on the committee, but it would seem that if now we're talking about extending the process out even further, it would seem -- i think we discussed before ms. avery's willingness to perhaps -- i'm sure nobody's gotten

this far yet -- perhaps come back at some point after, you know, she takes care of her family business, and we should keep that in mind i think if that possibility exists. >> let me interject some thoughts. first of all, thank you to the committee members, commoditier, moore, and antonini for serving on this. it's difficult and we started the discussion about a year ago knowing that it was going to be a tight time frame if we didn't hit any glitches and here we are with a little bit of a hurdle. i want to stress, and again, i wrote that in my letter to the subcommittee to try to expedite this process as best as possible so it doesn'tant become a detriment to the staff who are filling in for linda. i appreciate linda's -- all her years, and also appreciate and respect her desire to retire. so, i think it would be great

if we needed her and she was available, but i don't think we should as a commission depend on that and we should try to expedite this process as soon as possible. commoditier. >> i just thought maybe ms. avery could speak to -- because i know she had offered to be a resource, but i think it was clear she wouldn't be doing commission secretary duties and find out what is her willingness to do that in the future if necessary. and then also have director ram fill us in on the current strategy because i think the public would want to know what the backfill strategy is in the short term, at least. >> commissioner moore. >> as the chair of the subcommittee, commissioner antonini has made it clear over and over and over again how important it is to properly cast the role of the commission secretary. and perhaps he should speak to that so that the public

understands and everybody of this commission continues to support us, that this quest is properly executed, including the liabilities that we strongly feel which could arise if this is properly done, could put us in a very difficult situation, would make it very difficult for the city at large. * isn't properly peroral done >> commissioner antonini. >> commissioner moore, what did you wish in particular i would talk to? >> just you have always held high the standards that the competence of the secretary needs to be with processes which require a person of mature judgment and mature qualifications to take the position, given that the city, indeed -- so, any miss step of how we are guided, ourselves in this process could potentially get themselves in a difficult situation. i'm repeating what you have -- >> definitely that's just one

of many items. and we have had comments from members of the public at our subcommission meeting -- subcommittee meeting in regards to that particular element. and we've all seen situations where because of any minor, what would seem to be a minor processing situation, that projects are continued. so, it emphasizes how important the accuracy of process has to be. you know, notification to the public and records requests are huge issues. and these are all things that become more and more complicated as we move forward and we are just basically arguing that we cannot stress highly enough the importance of this job and the classification has to be appropriate for the job as it exists. you know, without getting into any particulars that i can't do in public session, but that's

just one of many items that are under discussion. there's like six to eight categories of -- that are discussed during this thing and they have to do with items of what -- define the job description and define its importance based upon certain criteria. and our general feeling in looking at these criteria is the interpretation was not perhaps accurate based upon what we have seen. i've seen in my ten years, and what the other members of the subcommittee have also seen. and i think members of the public, you are aware of how difficult it is and how much happens here at every one of our sessions, not to mention all the detail that goes on all week long so we can even have a meeting. and those are important issues. is that kind of what you had in mind? >> yes. >> thank you. >> commissioners, to try to

address commoditier's -- commissioner borden's request, i do have some family issues. that's why i announced my final date. i am not going to be available for the rest of this year. if this process is still going on after that and the burden on staff is such that you need assistance, although i won't make a hard and fast promise, contact me and we'll see where i am at that point. if i'm able to come and assist, i will. if i'm not, i'll let you know. but i think it's real clear that i will not be available for the rest of this year. >> okay, thank you. [speaker not understood]. >> just to address the question of interim staffing, i think you know we've asked jonas

ionin to step into linda's shoes. jonas has been linda's primary back up the last couple of years. he has asked to assign two of his planners to rotate the management of the public information counter in his place because that's his normal job. so, he has asked two of his staff to rotate on a two-month basis the management of the counter. and then what we have done or jonas' back up is likely to take several months in case he's on vacation or needs to be out, we've asked andrea green to step in. andrea of course is my assistant, but she has in the past staffed the commission and been the commission secretary. although i think she will probably need some refresher training in the interim. so, the bottom line is that jonas will be the interim commission secretary and andrea green will be his back up. >> commissioner moore. >> could we ask the director a question?

we had all together expressed concern of the work load it would put any person who has a full-time job and takes on a second and a third full-time job. by second and third, i mean both historic preservation as well as planning commission. so, we are concerned about how a person is able to handle that. even if he has the back up. and we are saying that in support of jonas ionin because if you had asked me i'd say no because it's just too much. >> that's why jonas will step out of his role as managing public information counter and there will be two other folks who manage that counter as his replacement. so, this will be his full-time job. * until a new secretary is chosen.

>> okay. is there any public comment on this item? this discussion? okay, next item, please. >> thank you. commissioners we can move forward to director's report under which we have director's announcements and a review of the past week's events at the board of supervisors, board of appeals, and the historic preservation commission. >> thank you. i just did want to report on this urban prototyping festival that commissioner moore mentioned earlier. it is sponsored by the -- i forget the name of the organization all of a sudden -- the gray area foundation for the arts. it is a nonprofit based here in san francisco. and the festival is essentially a day long event that is focused on the public realm, but specifically about the interaction of urban design, public art and technology. and how those three interdisciplinary field can come together and address

issues of the public. in fact, it is essentially -- festival may be an incorrect word. part of the event is essentially a workshop that were folks from those three disciplines come together and create prototypes for thinking of the public environment in a different way. and they will be posting these. and the idea of these is they can be replicated in across the country. it is taking place saturday -- i forget the hours, excuse me -- i believe it's from noon to 10:00 p.m. and it's taking place around the streets around 5th and mission around the old chronicle properties. literally they'll be closing off those alleys on the southwest corner of 5th and mission where the chronicle buildings are today. there are some speakers between roughly 12:00 and 4:00. i will be speaking late in the program just in general about the city's growth and how we're thinking about the public realm. and then later in the afternoon and evening there will be music and other events going on as well.

but it's a very interesting -- the idea, i think the most interesting part of it to me is that the interdisciplinary actions on how one might address the public realm differently and it is meant to be replicable in cities across the country. we certainly welcome your participation. thank you. that's it. >> thank you. the board of supervisors report? >> [inaudible]. planning and land use activities. this week there is one item at the land use committee. it is an ordinance that would amend the administrative code to ensure the right to return to revitalized public housing. this is sponsored by supervisor olague. the commission heard this item on september 27th and at that time the supervisor was still working with the mayor's office of housing of and the san francisco housing authority on some potential amendments. so, at that time the recommendation was to recommend

approval of the return policy, but you do not take a position because it is in flux. since you're here, the supervisors continue to work with both agencies and the ordinance was amended with their support in earlier october. this week the ordinance was unanimously recommended for approval to the full board. there were several items at the full board this week. the first was an update to the community safety elements of the general plan. the commission recommended approval of this on june 14th and this week the board approved the ordinance on final reading. secondly, there is an ordinance that would change the threshold for the inclusionary affordable housing program. this commission recommended approval on june 16th. this is the companion ordinance to the pending housing trust fund charter amendment that the voters will consider. as was amended by the board the city will be able to monitor the effect of housing production of this potential change and can decide to