plazas. so activation we want to give you examples of activation those are activation types of event in various stages in san francisco. now that we've talked about the types of plazas let's golden gate get back to the steward of the plaza. my apologizes for the complexity of the slide i'd like to ask your patience how a steward will be designated it's on and on online and in your packets. if we start at the doted green box plazas emerge from various city incentives pavement of the

parks and o e w d initiatives one the long-term needs are beyond the city's resources and there's a maintenance solution and the plazas fits the plazas criteria than the city could determine the type of process. this process involves the working groups and the processing process will also be informed biology eric's for the state like vehicular states once the type is established the plazas program will administrator one of the two programs in the red boxes. each process riders board of supervisors approval of the steward so allow me to walk

through the parallel above the blue line. a reminderer those are the types of plazas not right-of-way not streets. so you see in the top line it egging messenger through the normal path of an rfp process. this plaza is being identified for the program and the rfp will allow for robust plaza plans for stewards to be submitted and ongoing community outreach and once the steward is identified the city will give a permit that will be presented to the board of supervisors for approval and implementation of the agreement could happen. now let's look at the parallel plaza city process dramatized below the line. this process is essentially

parallel to the city process but slightly different because the city is acting in hits regulatory process with a permit here. in a similar way the street plazas will have an open permit process where the stewards can submit their permit we have it right away right now as a thirty paying day period. there is ongoing outreach and the permit he would be identified and work with the city to be presented to the board of supervisors and for adaptation. all plazas have a term of 5 years or less if the strurd is having subsequent improvement. for example, this process we look at 3 examples.

a reminder this is a elective package doesn't include the stewards it will have to be adapted on a plaza by plaza process and approved by the board of supervisors. the first example is the hub plaza. the plazas program and incentive as a home is dreaded out of other processes. macomb hub pleasing is created by freeway on market and octavia. it's 0 identified as a community open space why did octavia market plan through several years the use of the space is a multiple space for the plaza is

identified. the city facilitated many things to activate the area one was an intensive quadriplegics and the ma can get up hub construction on this space has just begin. it's not needed a move the traffic it could use the city plaza agreement type of in adapted under the program. the second one is jane warner plaza. jane warner is a plaza that emerged from the parks program in order to create a vibrant gathering place in the castro

district. it's through a demonstration project and it it will see more permanent improvements since jan warner has a streetcar running through it. there's an ongoing desire for activation in jean warner as well as activation needs. the third and final example is diego rivera it park it's planned to be on 16 street and 17 street at the bottom of katrero hill. i'm sure you're familiar with diego rivera it and it's in kind agreement came before the competent. it is for creating and

maintaining the agreement and it's adapted in the plaza program could be a city plaza. please note there's no a specific activation need and it could be more maintenance and both and not all the plazas have a need for activation so the summary of the schedule now that i've shown you rightone: or examples. as you see the chapter 94 has 3 supporting elements one it or is in the planning code section 2, 3, 4 point e you've looked at today and also describes the activation like i've described.

the work program for program plazas and you right-of-way the police code is the aim to make it less process heavy and less expensive to do music events. so in conclusion the plazas program supports local stewardship efforts and the sustainability and supports trorm the public grounds and has several things that enhance collaboration with city staff and other stakeholders it will strengthen san francisco vibrant community. beyond supporting the local community near the plaza s it could support communities of artists and musicians.

the plazas program tries to improve the cities ability to practice for clean and safe open space than is currently available with city resources. this timeline shows the elective schedule if the program is adapted implementation could give up in may we hope to adapt 3 plaza by the end of 2014. >> just in the interest of time i want to do a couple of issues really quickly. how is this program not promoting privatization. those are publicly owned properties these will be accessible with minor people to

walk across the city we're working with the stakeholders to help maintain the undertaking their city public-private open space. they've go through a vetting process with the city staff and each one will go through this board of supervisors and at the full board before approved. if the steward doesn't meet their obligations we'll evaluate them and there will be stipulations in the agreement they can be terminated if they're not performing. are those spaces public will they be closed for private i've covered that. those are public spaces we've proposed to allow up to 8 days per year that's up to each plaza

steward will actually have to propose 1 to 8 days a year and the board of supervisors working with the local community will decide if it's 57 times a year or 8 times a year or no times a year. i'm going to turn it over to aaron >> good afternoon aaron star department staff. this item is going to be heard either we might continue that and you'll have an opportunity to act on the changes to the

planning code. i'm going to give you a presentation and it will be more extensive and based on your questions 0 i'll spend time open the presentation. so the changes to p zoned districts there are two parts. the first one is changes that directly effect the sf plaza program and the second part are changes that impact all p zone properties. so the changes that about the sf plaza program first to reiterate the admin code rec and park department are clued from the 70 program but the change in the code is for the sf planning codes code is under section 2,

3, 4.1 in the proposed ordinance and that one specifically allows for any assessor use in a plaza designated under the plaza program to be principlely permitted so regardless of commercial district and the department feels this needs to be strengthened so the assessor controls are controlled by an adjacent non-residential district. so that's basically the only change for the code in the sf plaza program. the amendments to 9 p district they apply to all p zone properties whether or not it's a park or has a police station, etc. those changes apply. it really optional modifies the temporary controls for the p zone it has other go modifications but their clear up

it's a lot of moving around of words but at the end of the day it's only single. i'm going to walk you through the scenarios. we have the existing codes what's proposed in the ordinance and what the staff proposed lots a and b. their technical difficulty with the power point presentations you're getting the shorter version. so lot a and b they're both zoned p. currently in the zone lot a is a quarter of a mile within the area. so the to limgsdz are for the adjacent commercial district. if the neighborhood districts prohibits restaurants on the p

zone lot. lot b is not within a quarter of a mile so the only controls are the policies in the general plan nothing to limit any huge in the planning code. so the proposed ordinance lot a is one quarter of a mile within the district and the general uses are limited. and tyler limited by the commercial district with changes so if the p in the adjacent commercial the use will be permitted in lot a and in the use will be permitted horrify if not permitted in the adjacent commercial district it will require a commercial limited use

and lot b the only control on t the general plan. the department recommendation gets rid of the adjacent commercial district concept and says the controls are based on the nearest non-residential district so lot a and b the closet non-residential district is right here which happens to be the outdoor mission neighborhood commercial district. so if the use is p in the nearest non-resident lot if it requires a limited use it requires a construction u on the

lot and if not permitted in the nearest zone we allow anymore flexibility on the p zoned lots to be more of a discussion if the use was prohibited in a commercial district to allow it on the p. there's other changes that are also happening that don't direct the uses. in the existing code p zone the term accessory uses and there's no specific size limits in the codes. the ordinance replaces the ancillary plays to 1/3rd of the principle use so currently there's no restriction on the

sues of the accessory use the ordinance will define a 1/3rd area restriction. the department recommendations the ancillary definition change and limited to the third floor area or lot area and we prohibit we recommend that i prohibit the formula retail if formula retail is band in the non-residential district in the p zone property. so that's the quick overview and i'm here 90 for questions >> thank you. let's open this up for public comment we moved item one until after this item to give the commission the benefit of hearing the public comment before we rule. if i call your name, please line

up on the screen side of the room (calling names) >> commissioner president wu can i make one comment just to clarify for the public the next item relates to the continuous we're going to have public testimony; is that correct that the public comment will be limited to the question of the continuous so if you want to speak to the substance of the proposal this is now the time to do that. >> okay. thank you. >> good afternoon, commissioners i've lived in san francisco for 39 years. proposed legislation that face tracks the development of public space despite the proprietors as

citywide community itch is made of the term use from accessory to ancillary use i checked dictionaries the unqualified use of the worded nonprofit is not to take over public space for the formula retail. what constitutes a nonprofit and what's the korea criteria. many organizations set up those and general tricks. how exactly would a nonprofit sponsor retail the public space will be closed to some public events. what does limited mean.

we have countless venues where people pay for venues. as i read the program process language does this foster limited outreach for the occupant and the inner sunset has proponents that have converted the plazas falsely represented to the neighborhood they don't have the support. the - does this mean that private security guards could control the plazas in new york the parks in the obvious many folks are happy that this distinguishes us from new york. the example of new york is troubling we have the dan park

that is kafrtd to a wealthy crowd and a posh restaurants and that's not intended to be temporary that leads to one major concern that leads to legislation that gets public space for activities. those are 3 minutes of concerns. this warrants this this is to ambiguous and that lacks public oversight and transparency >> thank you. next speaker please. >> good afternoon, commissioners i'm dennis. i'm also a native san franciscan. i've been living in the inner

sunset for 4 seven years. the control of public plaza to nonprofit organizations is a major shift in public policy and contrary to what was explained it will privatize public spaces the words ancillary and assessor are artifical from my point of view to allow the commercial venture on public space which the city doesn't want to maintains are the technical amendments appear to be substantive to promote and facilitate stunning private land to public entities this will prevent the p zone space. activities that are currently disallowed on p zone will be

permitted. isn't it private hissing tiger's the city space the city didn't want to maintain and it proposes to privatize properties. and san francisco plaza program proposes activating surfaces to bring in toekz folks to get revenue. it's prim and what will limit the size and scale of the public entertainment. allow the public respond. to whom will they express their objections. this expands the streetscape from the restaurants tables and chairs to full blown operations on public situations and through

0 the pavement program through the private corridors. one hundred merchants oppose this this will open the encroachment that currently exists and yet outreach has been minimal and fast tracking this is not good for the public interest. it should be discussed more than just the people at this public hearing. this discussion can not occur for the current adoption of the schedule we ask you promote the public hearing well before it reaches the board of supervisors. thank you you for your consideration >> thank you. >> thank you, commissioners dennis.

first looked like to say that the staff presentation sound like it was good the legislation doesn't match up with what the staff present if it did it would be acceptable. it promotes more than what the staff put forward. i believe that in order to make it workable all those limgsdz need to be built into the legislation so it's very clear. there's one thing clear and that's that the whole discussion about privatization has not taking care of on a public realm. there's a lot of controversy in new york that's been similarly proposed here there's a great deal of public concern about the consequences of those private

shuns. even though the nonprofits are the stewards of nonprofit if the legislation tackle as a whole permits the commercial activities to take place on the land that could mean including if theirs not reciprocation on the nearest commercial zone if there's no restrictions on formula retail you could put formula retail there. if this is not the case it ought to be clear this is not permitted in those areas and it is not. i would point to again to the situation in new york city where a similar practical very similar has been studied the nonprofit steward removed 59 beautiful shade trees and a garden in an

area that was an oasis and converted it to use 10 months to be used for events that include the public so the public only has access to dan rush parish park for two months out of the year. the next area of new york that raises a great concern is union square where the private nonprofit has placed a in this very historic park has placed a very high-class restaurants that's for profit even though the nonprofit is not profiting from it indirectly. union square i mean bryant square is the most damning of

those provisions. sorry >> thank you. next speaker please. oh, let me call a few more names. go ahead and come to the podium (calling names) >> good afternoon. i'm rancho i'm the director of policies and communications inform the san francisco parks lions i'm here to speak in favor of the program we think this is a wonderful way to add to the space and encourage stewardship of our public spaces. our streetscapes partner with public utilities that's a useful model to think about when our considering this program because it has allowed neighbors to take

an interest in underutilized public spaces and turn them into maskal neighborhood gyms the hidden sunset in the - a buff beautiful i'll work and the penn e pennsylvania garden has been a gem so we think this is a very positive extension of that idea. and we want to always encourage more activation and beneficial uses of public spaces while preserving the access to public space. i understand about this program it's very clear that the vast majority of the time the space