accountability is i think something we can work better on. in talking about the interdepartmental communication, i know we're focused on that here and now, but i also want to encourage you to and the process that includes community input. dpw's order around smf is the key memo that then director ed lee signed. really outlines what this process looks like and, supervisor kim, i know you asked or if it was president chiu asked for -- asked for guidelines on how is this working in your districts. two weeks ago we hosted a community meeting around the utility boxes specifically. we had more than 50 paraer advertise pants from all over the city who brought to us their problems and concerns as they're now dealing with that permitting process, how it affects them in their districts. and there are some improvements and i think we can make to the process. for example, notices are only [speaker not understood] can be really a problem. so, in looking at the

permitting process, but also on the outside looking at the enforcement of our own guidelines, how do we enforce those, how can we do a better job of it. right now we're seeing the city failing in its shall, but how are we holding private companies to the same standards? so, thank you for beginning this conversation. i know it's going to be a long one, but san francisco beautiful, we're happy to be a participant and work with the community. thank you. >> thank you very much. next speaker. good afternoon, supervisors. my name is drew howard. i'm a native san franciscan and actually formerly a staff member of sfmta but i am now retired and i am speaking to the issue at hand. it is a very important one and it's one that should be looked at in terms of requirements, needs, and desires. and i know that a lot of times the desires have a tendency of

overriding the real requirements. specifically, in terms of our operators and their rest room needs, we run muni service 24 hours a day in a lot of businesses. and indeed speaking to supervisor chiu's comment about businesses, my understanding is they've been trying to look for businesses. but a lot of times the terminals are really on the perimeter of the city and they're not the places where there are the most number of businesses nor businesses that are open all those hours. for our operators, to have to stop mid route foci an inconvenience to the riding public. and if i'm on a bus and all of a sudden we're stopping and i was recently -- the city had their annual softball tournament over at marina -- at the -- down by the marina. there was a 30 stockton that came along there and stopped

specifically at the field house in order to -- the operator use the rest room. that service was interrupted for that period of time. if that operator was able to go to the end of the line of the terminal and have something there, that would be much more appropriate and much more in keeping with the needs of the riding public. i encourage you to do as much as you can, but really look for the real requirements. thank you. >> thank you. congratulations on your retirement. next speaker. good afternoon. i'm elena butler. i live on douglass street in noe valley. can you hear me? >> speak into the microphone so we can hear you better. >> is that better? thank you. i'm here to speak to the at&t utility box issue. i'd like to speak specifically to the process and actually i want to refer to -- first to an

article that was in the newspaper on july 20th, 2011, when the board took the 6 to 5 vote. at&t -- thanks. at&t at that time agreed to conduct robust community outreach and also said that if ere we significant community opposition, they could do plans for specific sites. i'd like to point out that the process is not working that way. i was -- i found a notice on the utility pole in front of my house. when i returned from vacation announcing that at&t was planning to locate one of those boxes a few feet from my property line, and i had three days in which to object. i got a few members of my neighborhood to object and the next? step was at&t calling the meeting for those of us who did object we got e-mail notices saying they would be there tuesday, last thus at 10

o'clock. ~ i learned at that meeting this is how the so-called process works. they originally plan to locate a box at 24th and douglass which is a block and a half away, about 300 feet, a little more than 300 feet away. the neighbors in that case objected to that box being put there. and according to the at&t representatives, they then -- the neighbors and the at&t reps began marching up douglass street and they got to maiello indication and said, why don't you put it there instead and at&t said, okay. ~ my location i'm questioning a process where neighbors are being pitted against neighbors. and neighbors don't know my immediate neighbors. it's like this. [inaudible] >> thank you. thank you, and if you haven't connected with my office,

please do so. we try to track these to see if we can be helpful. it's right around the corner. all right, we'll do it. >> thank you very much. next speaker. good afternoon. my name is thomas sober. i live at 2200 trick ham street. i'm here to represent the sunset residents association. we are here to address the same situation with the at&t utility boxes. unlike bus stops or newsracks, which have a pedestrian purpose, the at&t utility boxes have no pedestrian purpose. this is a very complicated problem. i'm speaking from the perspective that i am a licensed architect for the past four decades practicing in the city, and i want to reiterate that the process has been just really very difficult on everyone for us.

i have volunteered my services of my firm to develop a plan that is based on locating these boxes on private property. we have met with at&t. we have substantiated that they are technically feasible and they are economically feasible from the perspective of at&t affording -- to be able to locate these boxes on private property. however, without my professional experience, we would not have been able to make that argument. so, i want to encourage this group to engage the neighborhoods and also professionals to derive a community-based solution so that we are not kicking the can up the street, as marlene just mentioned, and that we come to a consensus of how this process will unfold. thank you. >> thank you very much. next speaker. good afternoon,

supervisors. alex walker, san francisco beautiful. want to thank first chairman wiener for calling this meeting and thank you all for your time today. i walk 18th and castro all the time and that kiosk is a nightmare with traffic. we at beautiful are happy to be in the community with all these issues and especially when it comes to the permitting and enforcement on having really the eyes and ears on the street [speaker not understood]. we walked down market street from castro, from castro to montgomery which is where our office is located there. we found that 48% of the clearchannel newsracks were empty. we definitely appreciate having these newsracks myriad freestanding newsracks consolidated, but if there is not the coverage there, then we really have to kind of have an audit and say can we redistribute, eliminate?

on the overhead i'm going to try to improvise some visual aids here, pictures on the overhead [speaker not understood]. sfgtv? perfect. it's kind of hard to see here. you can see here, this is near the e-trade building is behind -- e-trade at market and sanford. you can see one rack here that is not being used and is a -- stickers all over the place. you see a lot of redundancy. you'll see a frame here which is dpw, which needs to be we need to work on regulating those more chollasly. another sf examiner, freestanding kiosk blocking that air why there. this is [speaker not understood] going to the bart entrance there. very busy, very busy intersection. enter you can see there's lots

of emptiness, redundancy with those. ~ finally, last picture here, you can see there is a lot that needs to be kind of regulated when it comes to freestanding versus these racks. >> thank you very much. next speaker. thank you. i'm milo hankey. thank you, supervisor wiener, [speaker not understood]. it's a great step. clutter street furniture, there is san francisco beautiful looks forward to participating in any opportunities to advance permitting enforcement. we spent a considerable amount of time in putting together order number 175 566. this is the memo that ed lee signed in 2005 regarding surface mounted utilities. we don't simply ask, but we

insist that we become participants rather than observers in a long overdue meeting for technical review. this memo calls for an annual review of technologies that would reveal optimal technologies for undergrounding or reducing the size of these cabinets. so, we'll be asking to be a part of that. the other part of this, too, is supervisor kim brought up a question before regarding at&t's efforts to locate their utilities on private property. my understanding is that it's a pretext or pretense of an offer. it goes this way out of dallas. $8,000 for permanent easement, that's the only way at&t says it will do business. no owner really wants to inflict that kind of permanent damage to their property. so, it might be -- i'll throw out this idea. maybe it's the city's role to do some price finding here and send to all the taxpayers in the city and offer to enter

into a city managed registry, property owners who potentially be interested in locating [speaker not understood] comcast or the city itself. let's find out what the true cost is of putting this on private property. that is a key tenant of this memo drafted and signed in 2005. thank you. >> thank you very much. next speaker, ms. aiello. good afternoon, supervisors. thank you so much for having this conversation, supervisor wiener. i think it's going to take a long time but it's way overdue. i'd like to say my name is andrea aiello [speaker not understood] and we've been working with dpw for over a year now in trying to consolidate those newspaper racks. there are so many empty newspaper racks in the castro/upper market district and we've been working very closely with the city. we did get one removed and i

can't tell you how many likes on our facebook page when we got when it was taken out and personal thank yous. so, i think people in the neighborhood really understand that these -- this kind of furniture is not being used in the way that it was intended. it's mostly advertisements. i'd also like to say na we worked very closely with j.c. de coe with the -- i forget what they're called -- the kiosks and the bathrooms. they taken credible care of the bathrooms. they're really, really great. they're wonderful in helping us to -- we utilize those kiosks. the fact is we have an extra kiosk now in the neighborhood with the sidewalk widening project and nobody knows what to do with it. we can't find a place to put it. there's just too many. and they do have a ceiling -- they do have -- the ceiling is probably 8 feet. and the other thing i'd like to -- one gentleman earlier mentioned that those freestanding newsracks are better. we still have some freestanding

newsracks at guerrero and church. i called and talked to the private sector and also the city about cleaning up those and it just doesn't happen. you know, i'm not sure what he was talking about, but i think the ped mounts are better. there are just way too many. thanks very much for start thing conversation. >> thank you very much. next speaker. good afternoon, land use and supervisors. i hope you had a nice 4th of july. ♪ and i'm proud to be a city citizen where at least i know i'm free and [speaker not understood] and clean it up and the bay and all the sea and i gladly stand up next to you and to clean it up today 'cause there ain't no doubt i love this city land

and the city by the bay-hay-hay and i'm proud to be a city citizen where at least i know where free and i won't forget and i'll clean it up clean it up oh, won't you please and i gladly stand up next to you and to clean it it up today and clean it up, the bay because i love this land god bless the city bay hay clean it up today >> next speaker, please. hello, ron austin local transport [speaker not understood] represent the 2,500 transit operators that drive

the trolleys, buses, trains within the city. i find it very interesting it was several months ago where we spoke to the board in a prop k meeting in the concerns for funding for the rest rooms for our members of our local union. and the one thing that i find very disturbing is that the sudden reference to, let's say alleged fiscal responsibility in funding rest rooms for our members. first of all, we refuse to allow to be treated as second class citizens in regards to using a rest room while serving the public in the city and county of san francisco. the operator rest rooms that ms. cavanagh first rolled out which was in the phase 1 plan, there are no businesses secondary to the southeastern corridor of the city which was formerly pretty much all industrial. there are no businesses. there are no restaurants. there are nowhere for our people to go or for the agency to get licenses for our people to use the rest room. that's why it's imperative at

least at this first phase that we get cooperation from this board that we can see that plan to its fruition and we can look at other options later on down the line since there was an issue with a number 36 in total that we can still use a two-pronged approach, the agency going after licenses with private businesses and also where we don't have that option, we have the option to place these prefab units. this is a very important issue. it's a health and safety issue. and i'll have to ask, if there's a concern about a rest room costing $175,000, how much does it cost for the city in workers' compensation costs for renal failure of an operator? and i think it's a lot more than $175,000. thank you. >> thank you very much. next speaker. my name is mary beth [speaker not understood]. i live in [speaker not understood] supervisor wiener's district. i came here for the

consideration of the urban ag legislation because i'm a community garden coordinator. but i felt compelled to rile forfeit my speaking on that issue to address this one and with all due respect to the previous speaker, i want to comment on this to be the jaw dropping cost of providing rest room, individual rest room facilities for muni workers. i'm a muni rider. i took muni here. here's my clipper card. so, -- and i don't denied the need for facilities, but i simply can't fathom that this is a credible use of very scarce public dollars. and further investigation, just looking at the list there, i know there is a 24-hour walgreens at 24th and potrero avenue. san francisco general is right there, which is a very dignified institution [speaker not understood]. based on my calculationn'tv the entire budget for the city-wide

urban agriculture program which is about $100,000 is roughly half a toilet. and i find that outrageous. and it seems to me that it can't -- the -- even though this is only one piece of a very complex piece of legislation and a complex issue, it's not possibly be permitted to go forward as it was stated unless represented to this body today. thank you. >> thank you. and you can speak on both items. you don't forfeit speaking on the other. okay. is there any additional public comment? seeing none, public comment is closed. [gavel] >> again, i want to thank the departments and also members of the public for coming out today. i think this is going to be an ongoing issue in terms of the management of our sidewalks. and i look forward to working collaboratively with everyone to find a good solution and a good path forward. so, colleagues, president chiu. >> i want to take a moment first and thank our chairman of

this committee for holding this hearing. these issues impact all of our districts, certainly in my district which has the most density of any of our districts, our sidewalks are incredibly cluttered. and i think anything we can do to alleviate that is important in all these different areas. i want to respond a bit about the issue of prefab bathrooms. i want to make it clear, i don't think there is anyone saying our muni drivers should not have access to bathrooms. that is absolutely -- we all understand that importance. but is there a better way of doing this is the set of questions we're asking. and i have wondered if you were to offer the public or businesses or other entities that have bathrooms 5 to $10,000 a year to assist with this task, is there a different way to do it. that's really where i was going with that question. to that end, i would want to understand once these initial

six locationses are in progress, to really understand what the plan is for the remaining 38. we were talking about a dollar figure, that's about $6 million for what we're trying to achieve here. and i just wonder if there is a different way to do that. with that being said, i appreciate all the hard thinking that's gone into this thus far and look forward to carrying on that conversation. >> thank you. supervisor kim. >> i also want to thank the chair and our department for putting this hearing together. i think it was incredibly helpful for us to have an informational discussion on this item. it's certainly i think something that continues to be of concern for our residents and constituents. particularly, i think as we continue on growth and development in our city, we want to make sure that we are creating pedestrian pathways that are safe and are able to kind of serve the capacity of our increasing neighborhoods. i'm particularly interested in two issues, one was the issue i brought up with how we can have bus shelters in neighborhoods like the tenderloin where we

are getting incredible amounts of complaints about the shelters being used, not as a resting place for our residents, but really as a space for people to either use drugs or to kind of hinder sight lines of police officers for criminal -- low-level criminal activity. i think that's one area of concern for us. we would really love to explore with mta creative ideas around that so that the only solution isn't getting rid of the bus shelter. the second issue that is of interest to me although i didn't talk too much about it is of course the street furniture, but particularly on the sidewalks that lead to our open space such as our parks and our schools. so, i would be -- i will be reaching out to our department about some of the proposed street furniture on those blocks. thank you. >> thank you very much. so, if there are no additional comments or questions, can we have a motion to file this hearing? >> so moved. >> can we do that without objection? that will be the order.

[gavel] >> madam clerk, please call item number 2. >> item number 2 is a resolution imposing interim zoning controls for an 18-month period requiring conditional use authorization for limited financial service and business or professional service uses in the upper market neighborhood commercial transit district; making environmental findings and findings of consistency with the general plan and with the priority policies of planning code, section 101.1. ~ transit district >> thank you. i'm the author of this legislation. colleagues, today before us are interim controls that i have -- that i'm proposing to address potential -- challenge relating to the significant new development occurring along the upper market corridor. we have quite a few developments happening along upper market between octavia and castro, and with a significant amount of new retail space that is going to come online. this is an exciting opportunity for the neighborhood in terms of a new retail space, more

activation of our streets, more opportunities for residents and visitors to the neighborhood. particularly in parts of upper market east of sanchez street where you see right now a drop off in the amount of retail and pedestrian foot traffic and that is going to change which is going to be very positive. we have also seen the potential of some of that retail space being used for nonactive retail uses, office use, potential photo companies, real estate companies, et cetera, and uses which provide important services in our community, but with too much -- taking up too much of the retail frontage, could de-activate the street lights in the upper market area. right now in upper market there are basically no controls on

using retail space for those kinds of office space, specifically limited financial services and business and professional services. there are other mtds around the city that require conditional use in order to use street level retail space for those uses and these interim controls would provide for an 18-month period that in order to place limited financial services or business and professional services on the street frontage in upper market, a conditional use would be required. we are in a unique period in the upper market neighborhood in terms of addition of so much retail space, and we really have a one-time opportunity to get it right. and if we don't get it right, it's going to have long-term ramifications for the neighborhoods. so, this is a very measured approach that would require conditional use for this type

of office use on the street level. and, colleagues, i ask for your support. so, ms. rodgers from the planning department. >> thank you, supervisor. ann marie rodgers, staff of the planning department. as the supervisors know, this particular item has not yet been heard by the planning commission and will not be heard by the commission if the very nature of interim controls, that they require quick action and do not provide for such a noticed hearing. that said, the department staff have reviewed the interim controls and we believe that this is an important step in ensuring appropriate land use in this area under transition. a policy concern with the uses that supervisor wiener seeks to control is that these uses are typically deadening uses. interim controls take a step towards ensuring active uses would be required for all spaces in the upper market nct by requiring this commission review. without such review, these uses could be approved as of right

in certain areas in this district. the code requires active uses, but only for the market street facing facades, and certain side streets such as church also require active uses under section 145.4. but it is notable the code doesn't currently require active uses on side streets such as noe in this district. and it's on these corner parcels where they may have just as much prominence when they are on the side street as if they were on the market street facade. one of the uses that is the focus of this interim control, the business and professional service uses would actually be prohibited on the market street facade, but here on the side street it would be -- it would not even require neighborhood notification as with the other safety controls which is the limited financial service. so, we would like to work with supervisor on perhaps applying these active use controls throughout the upper market area and believe that this interim control will provide

the commission, the board, and the public with the opportunity to and the issue and develop permanent controls that are appropriate without sacrificing the lively character of the area while we undertake this work. and for this reason we would recommend that the land use committee move this forward with a positive recommendation. >> thank you very much, ms. rodgers. colleagues, do you have any questions? okay, we'll now open it up for public comment. i have one card. andrea aiello. good afternoon again. andrea [speaker not understood]. and while the board has not taken a position on this, it it kind of came up quickly, i just wanted to comment that the cbd and other planning organizationses were involved with supervisor wiener in talking specifically about this property on noe street and there was a strong consensus

that the new retail be broken up into small spaces, small spaces that would accommodate small privately owned businesses, retail businesses, and not, you know, have the space be another financial institution. i just wanted to say there was a lot of community discussion about that and kw in the end that this space was to be divided up into small spaces for business use. thank you. ~ agreement >> thank you. is there any additional public comment on item number 2? hearing none, public comment is closed. [gavel] >> colleagues, i have a motion to forward this with recommendation. sorry about that. supervisor kim. >> i wanted to make a motion to pass this with recommendation or send this forward to the board with recommendation. and i know that there are a

number of these actually in formula retail controls that are being proposed throughout the city. so, i know our office is going to be introducing one tomorrow that we announced last week on mid-market from van ness to sixth street. and i think there just is, again, an increasing discussion amongst a lot of our neighborhoods in terms of the types of businesses and the character of the neighborhoods that we're trying to build as development continues. so, i look forward to having this ongoing conversation with the planning department as we move forward with these interim controls. >> thank you. if there is no other discussion, can we take the motion without objection? that will be the order. [gavel] >> thank you, colleagues. madam clerk, can you please call item number 3? >> item number 3 is resolution acknowledging receipt of the office of the city administrator's recommendations regarding the establishment of an urban agriculture program; supporting the recreation and park department as the location for the new urban agriculture program to coordinate the city's urban agriculture activities; and setting reporting goals related to urban agriculture. >> and the author of this resolution is president chiu. >> thank you, mr. chair. colleagues, this legislation is a resolution that falls on the heels of legislation that i had sponsoree