the mayor's office know. thank you. >> next speaker please. hello, i'm amber with nature in the city. i'm speaking in favor of this proposal i wagging agree with a lot of the views but we've n been in the street parks program. you have amazing support from 0 parks alliances and other groups private and pun we're a nonprofit organization and we're professionalism a beautiful imply habitat in the neighborhood and we've got support to do this project and we've had this incredible

success. so just speaking in favor of nonprofit activation. >> thank you. is there any future public comment seeing none, public comment is closed. commissioner antonini >> well, this sound like a promising program and the speaker expressed any feelings about how much new york has proved you didn't want to be in the parks in those days several not the neighborhood parks they've done american people outstanding job of making them safe and appealableable and making them clean are i know there are concerns but i think the stewardship is a good kept. the stewards would have to take care of the maintenance and

provide the security and all monies generated would go booking back into that particular park that makes sense to me. we've had city parks that are less than what they should be like the basketball courts within embarcadero and mission their campgrounds for homeless. the plazas and unplaza have a lot of problems going on there most people acknowledge they're a lot of drug dealings and those are entries into our cities and particularly people who come by muni and washing into bloomingdale's and that's not a good reputation for us. the staff has done good things

we feel safer and feel a lot better. we can take examples of the successes in the private sectors and levy is behalf and clean and safe the same thing same with the lukes project although in the presidio it has the jurisdiction it's a really good example so i'd be in favor of this plan i don't think the owners has to be a nonprofit. i don't see a reason why, you know, with, you know, some sort of process why the commissioner and other groups we could have stewards that are nonprofit organizations that have to go through a conditional use or process to make sure it's correct. the same with formula relative

retail. i think prohibition have wrong the plaza is not what the neighborhood district is nearest each plaza has to be elevated individually and tom is right about the p zoning it's two general and should be revised and worked up to include a differentiation between parks themselves. i've heard good comments i want to hear more it's going to be continued it will be decided by the next item and it's moving in the right direction. most of my questions is everything a possible there's got to be a producing process you won't see a 34kd up in a public space but what is there

will be appropriate and will be destined properly to be pleasant and fit in with the neighborhood. see what the other commissioners say >> commissioner sugaya. >> i'm more concerned about the process and i think there nooetsdz needs to be more process we keep fighting against more process in the city. i've looked in vain of the organizations you've contacted there are hardly any neighborhood groups in there i don't think that commercial neighborhoods are in there. i'd encourage you to reach out prior to come back to the commission. i think it needs be vetted.

unfortunately, we don't have a map or listing or anything that identifies anything where this program is going to take place. we have two or three works they're almost all implemented so i have no idea and no clues as to where those is that a are other than the definition that's been given to us with respect they're not rec and park department properties but private properties in the definition of real estate puc and other. so it can't be two difficult to show us where those potential over 2 thousand square feet spaces could be we have a robust i think gi s system that can accommodate that. and tom's idea of looking at the

p zoning and trying to make further divisions is in order. frankly i don't know what the all p zoning legislation says but if indeed it makes sense to do that i'll encourage you to expand this a little bit. in terms of the actual program. i guess one thing is that i kind of did pass over it says a activation or a ordinance if you read what's up on the screen it says activation or a maintenance. so i'm concerned the statement made by staff was that if there's monies that come into the stewardship program the

steward is able to raise money and that goes into activation there has to be a maintenance clausz in there. tom is a shaking his head yes. we want to think about whether or not there is access monies that should flow into the program or another count of the plaza where excessive monies can be held i don't know legally if that can be done or not since it's city properties in terms of the program in the stewardship i'm a little bit confused. if there are a plaza mr. rich and i have a nonprofit i don't

care specifically in order to be a steward whether that nonprofit i come to you and say i'm interested the plazas x i'm proposed to be a good steward i can bring in other vendors and bring in the lady that testified she does the one that side the music programs and so she wouldn't medical have to be a steward; right? i can bring her on >> that's correct i'll elaborate. we having had a lot of conversations. we choose to limit the stewards to nonprofits precisely to calm the fears of privatization that

are attached to business interests so this was a deliberate decision. i think people would rather limits those to nonprofits. rewarding regarding your specific questions the steward in getting permission from the board each and every time will have to lay out a plan for activation of the plaza how many vendors and this and that the answer a yes, we don't expend the next cart guy he's a - but the steward would tell us their plan and we'll hold them and evaluate them to that >> thank you. >> commissioner fung. >> well, thank you my thoughts are similar with commissioner sugaya i'm supportive of the plan.

i can think of a handful of areas we've seen green areas or open space i'm sure that neighborhoods would love to get their hands on and create benefits. as we've brought this forward we clarify this is not including rec and park department places but the average person will assume it's part of rec and park. another thing first of all, if a real list of the potential locations could be identified and spread out throughout the city so really and in wealthier areas or areas that can accommodate a food truck so have it spread out for the clarification so the activation

is really spread out throughout the entire city my that's pretty much i'm in supportive of >> i want to reiterate this is clearly not intended to apply to space that's managed by rec and park. in the administration code sections that are proposed not before i informational only it's clearly spelled out in capital alerts so to speak that the plazass may not exist an rec and park land. but we're happy to work with anyone it's the last thing you want to do is have unintended consequence pr there was a gentleman in the app stayed it the map doesn't match the legislation. we're happy to make sure that

the presentation matches it, it's the intended consequence. i don't have any problem making sure with the administrative code and the police code and do planning code match the intent of the program. just to is a word about the outreach in the neighborhood vs. the citywide. we recall thinking about introducing the program and have 5 or 10 plazas attached to it but there's a few reasons and those correlate you can't see why we're giving you a list we have sequa problems no eirs we couldn't tell you we were going to do something in advance and we thought, you know, every neighborhood is going to have a robust discussions around whether or not it's appropriate for this particular plaza to

come in we've designed that to go before the board of supervisors about the use of public land. we wanted to separate the concept and thought it was a wise thing to do. we did our outreach to citywide organizations that deal with and care about public space. i think most prominent is san francisco beautiful we've spent time talking to. not for this process but to afterwards go and do the process. we never thought the board would approve those without the outreach. we deliverability separated it that said we'll go ahead and do the outreach and bring in as much folks as president to talk

about this >> thank you commissioner hillis. >> so additional questions i think this hearing is good it's complex. i've dealt with folks in the area i don't know whose controlling it whether ate - it's complex. you know, you mentioned you didn't want to bring in a list of plazas what are the nature ones that would fall under this >> it's clearly unplaza and others that are nature. >> i give you with some ininterpretation i didn't want to - i gave you a list in the beginning i'll try to add nor like mid plaza and jane warner

plaza and an area on 22nd street that is closed off a couple of the a week to do a market and san jose and market come together and there's that meeting area that is a open space the ma copy i am and that's actively the estimate our and the diego rivera it plaza and that will be a plaza approved and the how houses i didn't plaza is not a rec space it's between public works and the real estate department it would be slim if i did. >> the unplaza. >> we're honestly the unplaza

is so big and complicated we thought not to bite it off in the first round but could become part of the program. >> who maintains jane and the castro. >> thanks for the question. most of the plazas are generally maintained by public works department. there's a baseline movement that goes on and it's clearly not enough. the point of this program first of all, is to work with dpw to make sure they don't stop the baseline maintenance and to work with the stewards to sort of supplement that like major steam cleaning like dpw continues to

do but picking up litter we think a steward could help us but when we come to the stewards there's a question of or a they're going to say i'm making up those numbers a budget of 50 thousand we think we can spend 40 thousand on this and that and other on activation but we'll make sure that the maintenance come first but we want to have things happen >> the telephone pole hope is to keep dpw or the level of funding continue. and different plazas are created differently like the house i didn't plaza it's not the

easiest to maintain whoops if no one comes down >> if no steward that can demonstrate they're up for the job we won't put the space into the program. i mean right now we have a lot of spaces that don't have this to do this we can't find one for every space >> who maintains the agreement with the steward. >> an unfortunate level of complexity here because the street lazy have to be dealt with different if it's a street right-of-way it's management dpw under a permit. we think the majority of permits will not be street thorough ways it will be managed by the department of real estate the home of that program >> all right. and lynn wants to do a program what's the kind

of appeal or, you know, normally she'll do inform getting up and ask but the steward who's overseeing the claiming process. >> ultimately it goes back to the department of real estate and because it's a non-right-of-way we think, you know, don't intend to set up the program and encourage stufrdz to say no and the good reason needs to be dealing with height and safety and we'll have a several yearlong agreement that describes the general activities and that will be evaluated every year or two and if the steward is not inclusive enough we can terminate the agreement.

it will be the other departments that control that >> you have to be clear if i don't get a permit. >> there's a more robust appeal process we should put that in. >> i image the agreements with the steward will be tailored with the conversations with the neighbors. >> right we have no doubt when the board is considering a steward agreement that the neighbors will be involved and make known what they need and finally, there's we got an e-mail and a bunch of people from the inner sunset i don't know - >> thank you do you want to address. there's a proposal i don't know about it our other was is not involved but to close avenue a

off a block for the purposes of a plaza like space. i want to emphasize this program is not about making new placing happening only more moing them and the example in the inner sunset i imagine go to mta and the board of supervisors i haven't researched this after the traffic studies and everything were dealt with then we would say this is a candidate for the program but we're dlooibl staying away from the decisions we're not involved in closing the streets >> it's important to note that the different if you have a steward and those agreements you

can't what can be at a later date so the food trucks in jane warner park that would be specified in the agreement that no imperil activity if you put out our beverages there's problems. >> right now there's one universal limitation no more than 8 days a year for private events and other limthdz people want us to consider so no more than other universal limitations and below that every neighborhood can all that. >> so formula retail. >> i have no problem. >> well this answers a lot of

questions i think people are generally on the same page as generally where this is going. i want to see this continued by long-range a week or month so people can talk. i think it's complex so it has to be explained that alley plaza has a different process than union square. i think - >> we're comfortable with long-range a week. >> thank you commissioner moore. >> i think it's worthwhile to spend energy on how to increase and manage the activation of the plaza. my questions is to who we're jumping a little bit two enthusiastically to define the programs which as many of the people have identified one lack

that kind of disclosure and the neighbors don't know how to impacts them. for example, if we have proprietor projects which you commented on 6 of them today, i wouldn't be clear how it effects us we should discuss what i currently building is a conflict between the activation and this two broadly sweeping legislation that trios to refine p. the current definition of p in the city and county of san francisco the first thing so be really adapt and it could be all called potential areas of activation identify all of those

open spaces and as you say there are over 2 thousand square feet not under the jurisdiction of rec and park and they're probably not already existing business improvement district to see there's a prioritization of those spaces that are indeed attractive more sexy locations or activation or a maintenance can be achieved through a stewardship program. what i'm concerned about and this is quickly from the unintend consequences that when it comes to maintain only programs which might be necessary for the 2 thousand square foot places there are few or no stewards that want to take on a program like that. this is mostly and still to be

emerging neighborhood that are possibly in more remote or depressed neighborhoods they should have the same opportunities logically no one will be wanted to do this. we should be clear those are unintended consequences that could happen in the legislation that's currently written. i want to suggest we don't think about economic down times. which have not hit santa fe san francisco as hard as many other cities around the country. so what happened in an economic downtime when those grants asterisk plaza for activation falls short of having a steward a steward that can continue to

maintain his obligations as well as dropping the responsibilities. i think we need to think about that. just picking random thoughts the legislation is written two broadly and vaguely. i talked to you the other day when you yourself know did underlined nuances there's urban certs in the way it's written and when you present it it has to be understandable to everybody. i do want to pick there's no acronyms in your next. 8 times a year let's talk about that. let's say any steward wants 8

weekends or 8 sunday and wants all the sundays in july and august when others people really have the same need for being out in our active space but can't go because those are the days permited. we need to have a say they can't be grouped in a month e.r. week equally spread out over the seasons and this is not going to work with certain activation programs we have to look at all the pieces of public spaces that is being basically hopefully with good trust into the hand of nonprofit and not sent into private hands i'm not users

private hands broadly. ultimately nonprofits it all depends on who is it that does that the road of success is paved with good intentions but in reality i'm concerned with the good times don't have the capacity for management particularly they have enough to do to manage their own affairs they have rigorous progresses. so i suggest we look at that more carefully and identify the nonprofits that are perhaps an ininclination and close it to what's been activation. we've had people with trees and butterflies and other things whatever it has to be a match between the