out. i'm not going to make any analogies beyond that and i will say i might miss the hearings at at land use and ceqa -- almost. >> i'm not sure what we will do in the fall and thank you president chiu and i know everyone compromised this and had to swallow hard and i am appreciative where we are and in is the final piece and i am glad to make the motion. >> we had five hearings before you had to sit through one. this has been quite the process and thank you for participating. so on the motion to accept the amendments can we do that without objection? the amendments are adopted and on the motion for item 10 to forward to the full board as a

committee report take that without objection. that is the order. madam clerk is there any other business before the committee? >> that concludes our business for the day. >> then we are adjourned. test, test, test, test, test, test, test, test >> good afternoon. welcome to the san francisco board of supervisors land use and economic development committee. i'm scott wiener the chair of

the committee. and others. i want to thank sfgovtv for broadcasting today's hearing. and madam clerk any announcements >> yes, please silence any devise arrest items acted upon today will be on september agenda. >> item one is the granting of the permission to come up the hospital operations at 835 jackson street. >> thank you mr. chair this is a simple resolution to move forward the chinese project. in order to allow some tanks and vaults to be included in the public right-of-way.

i want to ask t dw to present the presentation and i have a couple of quick technical amendments so we can resolve the matter quickly >> good morning. i'm john from the department of public works. we have received a question from the chinese hospital. among them is a 5 though gallon storage tank for 4 transforms and two water storage tanks and a rainwater storage tank for reuse of rainwater. there's a petroleum station located under the sidewalk at 8:30 jackson street. those are the facilities that

are identified in the encroachment permit >> great. thank you i don't have any questions. we can go to public comment. i have a cough of technical comments. i'll record this into the record. there are a couple of references inform the public utilities commission on items 8 and 9 it is to be determined by the public utility commission and some language should be strictly and on page 3 line 6 there's a refers to the san francisco water department it should be for the public works commission. so those are technical amendments i'll move when we go

to public comment. >> great is there any public comment on to me number 1? seeing none, public comment is closed. i'll forward this to those the board >> so first could we move the technical amendments. >> yes. >> and i'll move this for the full board tomorrow. >> item 2 is an ordinance for the use of self-prethat he would to permits the projects to the city of san francisco. >> supervisor kim is the leg legislator and they want this to be turned to the call of the chair for rehe scheduling at a

later time. >> i'm happy to support given that supervisor customs not here it's solicited an interesting conversations. over the last twoou hours i've heard that the industry is trying to found a better way to muffler the sounds out of their planes. okay. is there any public comment on item number 2. i have two cards. before we take public comment i neglected to mention that supervisor kim was unable to be here can

>> it doesn't prohibit identifying marks on aircraft that are speculated if it's under the ownership of the

aircraft owner. so i don't know what the agreement is between good year blimp but there maybe an exception >> mr. walker. >> good afternoon. i'm alex from the beautiful. i think it's going to - i'm glad to hear about the muffle. and the biggest issue is with the faa response if they're continuing to having difficulties getting a response we're happy to have our d c america to contact them. and i'll be happy to certify in any way possible. thanks again for carrying this legislation >> thank you.

any additional public comments? >> good afternoon supervisors i'm steven. i'm a concerned citizen of san francisco county. i've lived here for 55 years and i'm disturbed about what happens over the park. a couple of saturdays ago we had 3 banners from papers above us so this is corporate sky graffiti. and we're very concerned about the impact of tourism too. this city is progressive but when it has an impact of its beans flying over the city we're concerned about the air and noise and visual pollution.

what's the impact upon our bird population let alone the human population. i'm in support of the baen and the elimination of all banners flying over san francisco county. this is getting a little bit ridiculous. the americans are taking 35 bits of advertising and if we can't look at the beautiful of the golden gate bridge we're not a beautiful city. i thank you for taking my testimony and i hope that san francisco has a better tomorrow >> thank you very much. >> next speaker >> david elliott lewis.

i'm against the prohibition i see it as a prohibition cabins free speech. while a lot of the speak might be commercial it gives an opportunity for groups to get their message out. not everybody follows twitter or facebook. i think getting a message out even 55 the unconventional ways i think it's a diversity we tolerate in our city. i hope this won't move forward. and i hope you won't ban this informational splie >> any additional public comment on to me 2. seeing none, public comment is closed. i am supportive of supporting

this to those the to the call of the chair. and as i indicated a previous hearing i'm not a fan of aerial advisement i'm not a fan of those aerial advertisements. what i also is a and i think i indicated many of this in the past hearing i think this this legislation was rushed in the way s it was brought forward. and the normal deliver way we bring it forward it was dividing the file and we're duplicating the file and to take it from a brief america's cup restriction.

i spoke this morning with i don't remember the name of the come that has about half of the market share on san francisco bay they indicate no outreach has been done to them and if they're the largest player and if they're the largest i'm assuming no one to the other operators as well. if you're going to be banning an industry it make sense to have outreach of this to say if there's a resolution. i'm also concerned about whether it would be legal to ban aerial advertising under the fellow law. i know this area of the law is a a bit of a mess with hawaii said

they could restrict this and there's been some regulations since them but it's unclear if that case law is applicable. so to go through expensive legislation to end up what the state go i want to be careful. so a continuance to the to the call of the chair make sense in terms of allowing the author to nail down the legal guidance to know what our chances are in court if the legislation is passed. so can we continue this to the to the call of the chair >> madam clerk call item 3. >> it's the planning code to have the standard i see

conformity for residential uses. we have a gentleman from supervisor avalos offices. and supervisor avalos what like this continued to the call of the chair we're hoping to have the city attorney to move forward on a portion of the project. to give you a brief update. the planning staff outlines this as 3 parts of the legislation. the main part is section 33 of the criteria considered when considering merges of residential units. it's our tennis to bring this more 40 in line with having an option to have affordable housing. we're hoping to move forward on

this. another part of the legislation section 181 deals with legally inconsistent non-residential units. there is some question on how those relate to the second unions. those are not traditionally in-law units their traditionally built before the zoning of the city and it's on a parcel that's zoned for two unit. we want to have legal protection for those units. at the planning commission they asked for additional time to look at this so we want to introduce new legislation and the planning commission will reconsider this on september 19th. we've hoping to move forward on

the criteria in september on a separate track to get our minds around this in the legislation. with that i'll leave it >> thank you very much so to continue to the call of the chair. >> yes, that's right. and supervisor avalos will be introducing new legislation >> the plan is to introduce amendments that remove section 181 to twisted the file but we can do that tomorrow. >> should we then - will this item number 3 if that's not relevant should we table it. >> we're planning to have this legislation h that will have everything but section 181 and

we'll have a new option to go back to planning. >> i want item number 3 to remain alive. >> yes, sir. >> we'll annoy open this item up for public comment? >> david east i do not lewis. i don't understand the chances being property but to the extent they give more protection i've lived in the city i've never seen such a high rate of evictions and above construction of condos and apartments. something is wrong in the city in terms of protecting the lower middle class and the poor.

and demolitions are a part of this so if it's slowed i think we should support this >> any additional comment on item number 3. seeing none, to the call of the chair? >> so move forward. >> madam clerk any additional information for the economy. >> that is all. >> okay. so we're coeconomy. >> that is all. >> okay. so we'r

>> on december 28, 1912.

san francisco mayor, sonny jim rolph stared into the crowds of those who have gathered. a moment in history. the birth of a publicly own transit system. san francisco municipal railway. muni as it would become to be known. happy birthday, muni, here is to the next 100 years. the birth of muni had been a long-time coming. over the years the city was disjointed privately owned companies. horses and steam and electric-powered vehicles. creating a hodgepodge of transit options. none of them particularly satisfying to city residents. the city transit system like the

city itself would have changes during the san francisco earthquake. the transition that will pursue from this aftermath would change san francisco's transportation system once again. facilitated by city boss, abe ruth, ushering in the electric city car. the writing was on the wall. the clammer had begun for the experiment including public transit people. owned by the people and for the people. the idea of a consolidated city-owned transit system had begun traction. and in 1909, voters went to the polls and created a bond measure

to create the people's railway. would become a reality three years later. on december 28, 1912, mayor sonny rolph introduced the new geary electric streetcar line and the new san francisco railway. that he said would be the nucleus that would host the city. and san francisco gave further incentive to expand the city's network. a project by way of tunnel leading into chinatown by way of north beach. in december the first streetcar was driven into the tunnel. just two years after its berth,

muni had added two lines. and k, l and m lines that span out from westportal. in 1928, the j line opened heading west to the beach. in 1944 san francisco voters finally approved muni take-over of the market street railway. by then motor bus and trolley bus improvement had given them the ability to conquer san francisco's hills. after the war most of the street-car lines would be replaced with motor or trolley bus service. in 1947, the mayor recommended replacing two lines with motor coaches. and it appeared that san francisco's iconic cable cars had seen their final days.

entered mrs. cluskin, the leader to save the cable cars. arguing that the cable cars were a symbol of the city, and she entered a charter placed on the november ballot. it passed overwhelmly. the california street cable railway was purchased by the city in 1952. there were cut backs on the cable car system and in 1957 only three lines would remain. the three lines that exist today. in 1964 the cable car's future as part of california's transit system was sealed when it was proclaimed a national historic landmark. in february, 1980, muni metro

were officially inaugurated. in that same year, muni received its first fleet of buses equipped with wheelchair lifts. in 1982 when the cable car had a shut-down, they added an alternative attraction to the cars. the festival was a huge hit and would continue for the next four summers in a permanent f-line that would extend all the way to fisherman's wharf, by 2000 the f-line was in place. and in 2007 muni extended the third line to the southeast corner and returning to third street. for the first time in 60 years.

in the course of last 100 years, muni's diverse workforce forged by men and women of innovation have reflected the many cultures that flock to the city. muni's ground-breaking antidiscrimination has guaranteed equal opportunity for all. the city's policy mandates the course for the future, as they work diligently to increase options and increase multialternatives, and deduce -- reduce the carbon footprint. it continues to improve the systems. during this sen -- centennial year we reflect on the transit

system. driven not >> please welcome them and we'll learn more about them and their work as what they will deliver to this commission as the eaglev goes. but thank you for joining. please welcome them to this commission. (applause) >> if we can call the roll, monica. thanks. >> this is the meeting of the commission on the environment. today is tuesday, august 6. it is 5: p.m. first item on the agenda roll call. vice president d'arcy? >> here. >> [speaker not understood].