>> colleagues, we have our february 5th, 2013 board meeting minutes. could i have a motion to approve those minutes? motion by supervisor cohen, seconded by supervisor mar. without objection, those meeting minutes are approved. madam clerk, any communications? >> there are no communications, mr. president. >> and if you could read our 2:00 p.m. special order. >> the first item of business is the policy discussion between mayor edwin lee and members of the board of supervisors. specifically district 4. the mayor may initially address the board for up to five minutes. the president will recognize the supervisor who will present her own question to the mayor. follow-up questions are in order as long as the entire discussion does not exceed five minutes per supervisor. >> thank you, madam clerk. mr. mayor, welcome back. welcome to all the questions we'll be asking you today. >> thank you, president chiu. i'd especially like to acknowledge our district 4 supervisor katy tang and like

to say the supervisors hit the ground running. i look forward to addressing the important question you have for me today. thank you. >> with that i'd like to recognize our mayor district 4 colleague, supervisor tang. >> good afternoon, mayor, colleagues, and i guess i'm the only one who has a question today. in light of major upcoming and potential new projects in san francisco that may bring job creation and spur economic development sur as america's cup and the proposed warrior's arena, how do you propose or how do you plan on working with neighborhoods that are further in proximity to ensure that these economic sunsets trickle down to all residents in san francisco? >> thank you for that question, supervisor tang. i want it say that making sure all our neighborhood benefits when we are successful attracting major benefits, which is a policy priority for me. if benefits aren't distributed equitably throughout the city, i think we will have missed a great opportunity. having said that, i do also say

that events in general bring a huge amount of revenue to the city. obviously the general fund is greatly benefited from it and linking it to a past question i had at this board, especially when it comes to filling up our hotels as we're one of the strongest conventions and entertainment cities across the country for large events. that our particular organizations that we've made beneficiary of the hotel tax also greatly benefit and those, both the general fund and the arts are much of the time subject to the decision making of this body as to the distribution of though funds. and i also say that there are three really major undertakings that we launch to ensure that equitable distribution happens with these great events. and those three fall into

categories of advocacy, information, and information sharing, and capacity building. in major events such as america's cup or the proposed warriors arena are in their formative stages. we need to make sure that they incorporate our neighborhoods and small businesses at that time. for the america's cup we have a work force development and local small business inclusion plan. this plan sets forth the employment, contracting and small local business inclusionary goals for america's cup 34, including promoting the employment of san francisco residents and generating business contracting opportunities for local small businesses. an example of this is that the america's cup is for the first time extending the construction [speaker not understood] wages to a private temporary debt and this is the first time it's done in the city's history. another example of this is during the construction of the warriors arena, 25% of the overall work force and 50% of

the apprentice level workers will be san francisco residents. so, when the fiscal arena report says more than 300,000 direct jobs will be created, we know that is a statement that is something directly related to our local work force. these two projects are great examples of gains that we have made through advocacy. the second is information. we need to get the word out to all of the neighborhoods about economic opportunities, partnerships with the chamber, for example, or the technology chamber, our downtown chamber with partnerships with sf travel, with the office of small businesses, with local community-based organizations both for profit and nonprofit, with you and your staff, supervisor, are critical components to make sure that all of our thousands of small businesses know about these opportunities.

to date, 2000 small businesses have signed up and learned about contracting opportunities through america's cup business connect, the portal that connects small businesses with contracting opportunities associated with the america's cup events. we are also working with sf travel to drive visitors and attendees of these major events to our neighborhoods. the third area we call capacity building and that is at work that's necessary to make sure that our neighborhoods actually have the capacity to handle event-related activity when it does happen. as part of our invest in neighborhoods initiative, performing assessments of 25 commercial corridors and those include tara ville, irving and noriega in your district, supervisor. and to build capacity we have also provided nearly $4 million in small business loans and facade and tenant improvements to provide critical assistance to our neighborhood commercial corridors. this approach, a sequence of

advocacy, information and capacity building will ensure we create opportunities and connect communities all over our city to those great event opportunities. thank you very much for your question. i look forward to working with you, supervisor, on this issue. >> thank you, mr. mayor. i think that concludes our questions for today. madam clerk, why don't we go to our consent agenda. >> items 2 through 4 comprise the consent calendar. an item may be removed and considered separately. >> colleagues, with would anyone like to sever these item? roll call vote. ant on the consent calendar, skim? supervisor kim? kim aye. supervisor mar? mar aye. supervisor tang? tang aye. supervisor wiener? wiener aye. supervisor yee? yee aye. supervisor avalos? avalos aye. supervisor breed? breed aye. supervisor campos? campos aye. supervisor chiu?

chiu aye. supervisor cohen? cohen aye. supervisor farrell? farrell aye. there are 11 ayes. >> the ordinances are finally passed. next item -- actually why don't we skip over the cpmc items, 5 through 7 until our special order and go to item 8. >> item 8 was referred from the land use and economic development committee without recommendation. the resolution granting street encroachment at 54 peralta avenue. >> supervisor campos. >> thank you very much, mr. president. i want to begin by thanking president chiu and his office for sponsoring this item. we have seen this item continued a number of times until some of the issues that were raised by the neighbors were resolved. and i want to thank all of the parties, including the applicant here and the residents of this neighborhood, for coming together to resolve the issues at hand. and i especially want to acknowledge the work of bob

besso, michelle kimbalt and acknowledge the work of the developer who worked in good faith to resolve these issues. and if i may, i'd like to ask john kwong of the department of public works if he's here. is mr. kwong here? okay, my understanding was that he would be here, but that's fine. as mr. kwong is aware, we have a resolution that will involve certain work that will be done by this developer to address some of the issues raised by the neighborhood. so, with that understanding, i would ask that we move forward and approve this item. thank you. >> thank you. colleagues, can we take this item same house same call? without objection, this resolution is adopted. [gavel] >> item 9. >> item 9 is an ordinance amending the administrative

code to rescind the sunset clause in the san francisco bonding and financial assistance program. >> same house same call? this ordinance is passed on first read. madam clerk, can you call items 10 and 11 >> item 10, ordinance a appropriating approximately $2.77 million of fee revenue for the planning department for fiscal year 2012-13. item 11 an ordinance amending the annual salary forectiontionv for i fiscal year 13 to reflect 8 positions in the planning department focusing on reducing the backlog. >> colleagues, can we take these items same house same call? without objection these ordinances are passed on the first read. [gavel] >> item 12. >> item 12, resolution providing retro authorization to the planning department to accepted and expend a grant from february 8, 2012, to july 1st, 2014 for 200,000 from the metropolitan transportation commission for the inclusion of streetscape and circulation improvements in the central corridor draft plan environmental analysis. >> same house same call? this resolution is adopted. item 13. >> item 13 is a resolution

providing retroactive authorization to the recreation and park department to expend a grant for the period of november 28, 2012 through june 30th, 2016 for approximately $77,000 from the california department of housing and community development for the park project and the mayor's office of housing park project. >> same house same call? this resolution is adopted. [gavel] >> item 14. >> item 14, ordinance appropriating approximately 118,000 to the san francisco department on the status of women for fiscal year 2012-13. >> same house same call? this resolution is adopted. [gavel] >> item 15. >> item 15, resolution providing retroactive authorization to the recreation and park department for the period of june 1st, 2011 through march 31st, 2013 to accept and expend a cal recycle tire derived product grant in the amount of 150,000 from the california department of resources recycling and recovery to purchase materials for use of various city park sites. >> same house same call? this resolution is adopted. [gavel]

>> item 16. >> item 16 is a resolution authorizing the execution, issue and sale and delivery of a multi-family mortgage revenue note and spored matt multi-family revenue bond in aggregate principal in amount not to exceed 30 million to provide financing for the acquisition and construction of an 8 l unit multi-family residential rental housing development known as the 21 75 market street apartments. >> same house same call? this resolution is adopted. item 17. >> item 17 is a resolution authorizing the mayor's office of housing to submit an application to the california department of housing and community development for funding under the calhome program. >> same house same call? this resolution is adopted gov >> item 18. >> item 18 is an ordinance amending the building code and adding various sections concerning seismic standards and making conforming changes. >> same house same call? this ordinance is passed on the first reading. [gavel] >> why don't we call items 19 through 22 around the western soma plan.

a these items were referred from the land use and economic development committee without recommendation. item 19, ordinance amending the general plan by adding the western south of market area plan making conforming amendments to the housing commerce industry and recreation open space element. the land use index and the soma east soma mission showplace square, potrero and central waterfront area plans. item 20, ordinance amending the planning code by adding and amending various sections to implement the goals, objectives and policies of the western south of market area plan. item 21, ordinance amending the zoning map street to revise use districts and height and bulk districts within the western south of market area plan. and item 22, ordinance amending the administrative code by integrating the western south of market area plan into the eastern neighborhoods area plan monitoring program. >> supervisor kim. >> thank you, president chiu. really excited to finally have the western soma plan come before the board of supervisors today. it's something that we have

been working on since i started in office a little over two years ago and as many of you know, has been within the community for the last eight years. so, i almost kant believe that this day is here and that we're finally at the full board for a vote. this comprehensive plan is an effort to build a complete and diverse neighborhood in the western soma portion of the city of san francisco. it provides a path forward to accommodate the immense development pressure in this part of the city with a mixed use integrated approach. and director john ram recently said that 80% of the growth and development is happening in 20% of the city and this is certainly a part of that 20%. this plan does recognize that there's a need for residential growth as population grows in san francisco. so, it does encourage more residential development, particularly when alley ways

boehm residential enclayvs. the rich cultural heritage including strong filipino community and lgbt community often best known in the area for its folsom street fair. we also focused retail development along folsom street with improved pedestrian activity, catalyzing is growth as the neighborhood commercial corridor. folsom street has already grown immensely over the last 10 years with victoria park, betsy car michael and many small businesses that have moved in from deli boulevard to radius citizen band and site glass. we incentivize creation of more affordable housing through higher impact fees and inclusionary requirements on sites that are a half acre or larger while maintaining the residential impact fee, the conversation we had at land use committee. we also provide an opportunity for arts organizations and light industrial to locate adjacent to one another in the use alley zoning promote preservation of historic building by offering less restrictive zoning and

embracing the entertainment corridor on 11th street from harrison to the next block on folsom. this plan is really a powerful tool to promote balance, preventing further displacement of the existing community of residents and small businesses while also integrating new uses with minimum impact to the existing community. this also testament to community based planning where collaboration really helped to highlight a common interest. diverse land use can coexist and not just conflict even on the same lot and where residents are partners in the process rather than just constituents. of course no plan comes especially of this size comes without any any opposition. we were able to work through a lot of the plan's most contentious issues and i really -- it's really a testament to our residents and community leaders for being able to work this out, one of course was 11th street which was originally zoned residential and now rezoned for commercial and entertainment. we are also able to work out

with an existing property owner that had long had plans to build residential since 2006 and he has graciously agreed to build office instead. i'm really confident that this exhaustive community process has taken place and the sound reasoning that both the planning department and the commission have offered within the plan. and i do want to take a moment just to thank some folks just because through eight years there's a lot of people to thank and i'm sure i will miss some folks. but first, of course, jim meko, the chair of the task force over eight years. he's actually watching us because he planned his surgery to occur after the western soma plan would go through. unfortunately we had some delays, so he is watching us from his hospital bed. and, so, we send our well wishes to him. and no, the plan is not older than jim meko. that is often a joke because of how long this plan has taken. i also want to recognize toby bee bee who is an architect and

vice-chair. john elderling, henry [speaker not understood], scott, commissioner london hide, jazzy collins, [speaker not understood] and mark solomon and [speaker not understood] to its last days. of course to peter cohan and fernando martee for their technical assistance and also wanted to especially thank our planning department director john ram, of course. but especially our planners who spent countless, countless hours on this plan working with our office particularly the last couple of months. cory teague who elegantly replaced paul lord who had spent years on this project and really came on, really without any kind of interruption and was able to continue the leadership from planning on the plan. jose campos, joshua, and of course paul lord who really gave a lot of his energy and heart prior to this plan. so, i do want to just

appreciate this moment that we're finally here and, of course, ask my colleagues for their support for this plan. also planning department is here to answer any questions as well as i. thank you. >> supervisor wiener. >> thank you, mr. president. so, i, as i've expressed in committee several times, i have significant concerns about the western soma plan. but starting on a more positive note, i really want to thank and acknowledge supervisor kim for her work and leadership around this plan. our disagreement, notwithstanding, i am actually very -- i've been very impressed by the way that supervisor kim and her staff have worked on this plan because this is not a plan that supervisor kim branded herself. it's been in the works a long time. i think supervisor kim and her office really worked hard to

try to acknowledge and where possible address concerns that were expressed and she accepted quite a few amendments. so, i'm very appreciative of that work and the flexibility. i also want to thank our planning staff who i think i joked in committee that they at this point deserve combat pay. this has been a challenging plan for the department and an awful lot of time spent, i'm very appreciative of that as well. we also were able to fix a very, very glaring problem with the plan around impact fees in committee where transit impact fees actually went down for some larger projects which were not consistent with our transit first policy. we were able to work issue fees out in committee. i do, however, continue to have concerns about some aspects of the plan. in general, i think that this plan is -- the level of control

and differentiation among different micro areas of the district, i think is too detailed, too, at some points micro managing of districts. i also have concerns about some pretty dramatic restrictions and prohibitions and office space in the sally area of the plan. and particular, i know he some colleagues may have heard from design professionals and architects who are basically no longer allowed to be in the sally unless they're grandfathered in as a legal nonconforming use. so, if you are a graphic designer, architect, someone who has office space in the sally portion of the plan right now, and if you want to expand, you can't do that. if you want to come into that area, you can't do it any more. this is an area that comes very close to bordering on fourth and king which is more and more going to be a major transit hub

in our city. and we are banning office space including for design professionals from this area of the plan. i also continue to have concerns around how the plan treats night life and entertainment. we know that night life is a major economic driver in our city and part of our cultural heritage. in the western soma area in particular, night life has played a huge cultural role. the plan in several respects i think is not sufficiently supportive of night life and entertainment. i do -- i am appreciative that we have resolved a number of issues around 11th street and that is a major positive. thank you again, supervisor kim, for that. but the plan is basically designed to reduce the number of entertainment venues over time by, for example, if there is a night club that no longer

qualifies under the new zoning, if it's not used at a night club for three years it would be permanently banned for becoming a night life night club again. i also believe that the restrictions around limited live performance permits in the plan area are too restrictive, allowing them on some streets but not others in what i believe even though i know that there is a rationale for it, appears arbitrary when you look at it, you can have it on 11th street, but you can't have it on ninth or 10th street if you have a cafe there and you want to have a guitar player and get a lp, live performance permit. these are concerns that i have that will not allow me to support the plan today. i do want to acknowledge the people who have worked on the community process leading up to this plan. i know a lot of people put a lot of work into it and i'm very appreciative of that. i do know there are people who were not part of the process

and some people who felt that they had to leave the process because of what they viewed as at times a my way or the highway perspective in terms of who could participate and what kind of views could really be a meaningful part of the process. but i do know that a lot of people spent time on this plan and i'm very appreciative of that, our disagreements notwithstanding. so, those are my perspective, and again, thank you, supervisor kim. >> thank you. supervisor campos. >> thank you, mr. president. you know, these kind of plans take a great deal of work and unfortunately they do take a long time. and i know that it's been many years in the making and i want to echo the comments and thank all the community members that have been involved, and in particular mr. meko who has been leading this effort for many years. and i know that he's watching.

i also want to thank the staff of supervisor kim and her office. as a district supervisor, any time you're dealing with a project as massive as this, you know that at the end of the day the work product is going to be something where not everyone is going to be completely happy with every aspect and facet of the plan, but i do think that supervisor kim and her office deserve a great deal of credit because they stepped into the process once the process had already started. and i think in a very short period of time were able to bring people together. and even though i don't know that i'm 100% thrilled with every piece of this plan, i do think that as a body there should be some deference given to the district supervisor who ultimately has been working on

this for many years. and with respect to issues of night life, i'm very supportive of night life, very supportive of making sure that we do not harm our entertainment industry. and what i'm appreciative about what we have before us is that i know that supervisor kim has worked very closely with the entertainment industry to address their concerns. and i think that the work that, that, that has been done goes far enough to, to strike a balance that allows the concerns of the neighborhood to be taken into account without undermining the industry which plays a very important part of not only the economy of that neighborhood, but also the identity of that neighborhood. so, with that understanding, i am happy to support this. i know that a lot of work went into this and there may be differences of opinion, but i do think that ultimately with this kind of a plan, the

deference should be given to the district supervisor. so, i'm happy to support this. >> supervisor breed. >> thank you. so, i'm familiar with the length of this plan and i think it's really great for the area. and i just want to commend supervisor kim for her hard work on bringing a number of parties together to try and come up with a reasonable agreement for this particular area. i do my best as a supervisor who represents a specific district to try and show respect and support to the supervisor who is housed with the responsibility of taking care of a particular area. however, there are just a few concerns that supervisor wiener brought up and i wanted to know specifically if minor changes could possibly be made, and i guess i would probably await to hear what the feedback is in terms of what those particular

issues are. one of the things that i'm concerned about as someone who is a big supporter of the arts, is the fact that there are limited live performance areas in the particular plan. and one of the things that happens with many small businesses and cafe and places that these places tend to hire local artists, just a real quick fun entertaining, very organic kind of thing. and this particular limitation in certain areas concerns me. and i was hoping to be able to -- i was hoping that consideration could be taken for other areas or clarity around that particular issue could be given so that i can understand, and i apologize that i wasn't able to figure this out earlier enough to talk about it before the meeting,

but i'd like some clarity on whether or not or why this conclusion was drawn to limit certain areas for live performance opportunities and small businesses around the soma area. >> supervisor, is that a question? >> it is a question, and i'm not sure who it should be addressed to maybe other than supervisor kim or -- i don't know who is in charge of kind of coordinating this whole project area. >> supervisor kim, you have the option to -- i know you're on the roster, but if you'd like to respond directly to that issue. >> sure, i'm happy to answer the issue about the limited live permits. so, there's was a suggestion that was made to our office, really actually on friday, that we permit limited live permits in the rcd within western soma plan which primarily encompasses ninth and 10th street. our response is that we need to do, a, neighborhood outreach to

that area to get feedback, and also listen to the concerns of the residents because it is an increasingly residential area. but second, that limited live permit policy is coming back to us as a full board in a couple of months and so that we can look at that issue then. this is not close%back%back -- this does not close that issue. if we are going to permit it in western some a it should be a city-wide policy. we should permit it in the rcd city-wide and not just specifically to soma. so, when that comes to us in a couple months, our office is very open to looking at that suggestion. ~ i'm a big supporter of llp. i come from the small arts nonprofit community background where we actually did thing without permits. i now realize years later probably had a lot of events i shouldn't have had, so, i'm very sympathetic to what our emerging artists face here in the city. but this is something that we can address in a couple months and does not need to be adre