go. >> per the code this commission and planning commission have to adapt it so maybe by the end of the year. >> no, the guidelines themselves we don't have a timeline. >> but we hope to engage we are formerly engaging stakeholders but to have something to reach out to the public by fall or winter after that there will be a long process and getting you'll the commissions and public on board with the document that could be another year. >> so if we can all that for goals. >> sure. >> that's great. >> sorry. >> i'm sorry sarah jones environmental review officer i want to add one point but that the 14 or recommendation 14 as a

it relates to the sequa which is that if you have a project that's consistent with the standards the presumption under sequa there's no impact but you can have a project that's national consistent with the impact that still has none so the connection of having the standards is over stated in the context of this report and so i think that's an important point to understood this may not be an unnecessary means to address those issues. >> sorry. >> yeah. >> commissioner pearlman. >> could you explain that again so basically you're saying if the staff says this doesn't meet the secretary of interior standards what happens then how does the department sign off on

something that doesn't moot the standards. >> the preservation staff responsibility one pack of their work is to determine whether a project is or isn't with the secretary of standards but a project that's not in sync with the threshold the impact under sequa does it teller impair the rows so it doesn't convey it's significance so the easily example a contributor to a historic district obviously demolition is not consistent with the standards but that demolition is not necessarily a significant impact on the whole it doesn't necessarily impair the district so such a degree

that the district can convey it's significance and eligible for listing. so it's a different threshold essentially and we have many times projects that are not consistent with the standards but not a significant impact under sequa >> commissioner wolfram. >> i think another example is the merced library it's not consistent with the standards but still a historic resource but doesn't have a significant impact under sequa. >> i believe that's the determination there i didn't work on that project. >> basically, it still is a historic resource even though the actual project didn't meet sequa. >> as sarah said it wasn't a significant impact under sequa.

the consistency is different than the sequa so sometimes that's a different element >> so mr. fry do you want to go back to sequa. >> tim fry depth staff the big take away is something we want to convey to a you is we all acknowledge the preservation bustling bulletin 16 is in high priority to get it updated to have the resources allocated to do that and as well as ms. jones building that a lot of the recommendations or concerns are addressed through the recommendations will be addressed through updating the bulletin 16. we talked about the ar cs refugee think in regards to a

sequa this came up a little bit when we were talking about the budget for that the next fiscal year for the subsequential cue of projects and the backlog for what it is, you know, you know, be not only are rehearing the frustrations of the public about the time is takes to process those permits but certainly looking at streamlining our own internal process to get those projects reviewed in a much timely manner but we have pilots we'll be come back to you and giving us information while 9 public is just looking at our process in terms of the time is takes behind the scenes this is a context process to review, you know, a project for various components under sequa we're

just trying to make that happen as efficiently as possible so putting less burden on property owners and more on the staff because of the amount of information we've we have 0 be able to compartment lists so get answers for the resources >> i first wanted to comment on the prior discussion about the secretary of standards for the safe harbor i'm not an attorney but i'm occurring what level of environmental review was required we're not common to the secretary of interior standards

but not seeing a significant impact in sequa do they have to do the r i r. >> for other reasons. >> can you come up. >> if it's not if there are no significant impacts under sequa and clearly no significant impacts under sequa there's no requirement to do an eir and they wouldn't have had to do an eir. >> thank you, ms. jones. >> i wanted to directing your attention to some of the other sections in sequa. specifically the recommendation this or that is the collaborative process where a project sponsor wants to comply that the secretary of interior standards but prefer to meet with the planning department staff and learn what we need to do s to have a compliant project

early on as opposed to going through the laborious processes and then find out their project didn't conform. i think for belittling 16 it will be helpful to have a timeline when the update is implemented you've been talking about that and it will be great to have that and recommendation 16 we've talked about the new process for conducting the hr e's. will clarifying what they're required for projects in designated historic district or adjacent or within the view of historic districts that's another thing that came up. we spent quite a bit of time and

gretchen is not here but she helped us there's a table or chart on page 27 and i don't know if you want to put it up for the public. but that chart basically - we worked on this project for 2 and a half or 3 years it felt like seven years we tried to figure out what the hr p process was and clarifying that and was it maples and when i do what and when you end up in which pipe is really, really useful. thank you >> thank you and actually mr. fry you will you respond. >> tim fry with the staff whether this is a separate bulletin or 167 we intended on developing a sort of a road map

on how to clarify the process. i i would say it's similar to the bulletin 16 timeframe we're looking at about a year from now we'll have something ready and finalized that's a complex process and will take time we've begun internal discussions and save time and streamlining our day to day work to see efficiency to incorporate into 16 that's our standard process not only when we have a backlog. again that will be a year but we'll come back to talk about

the process to develop the process >> we'll need a check in along the way. >> certainly september or october. >> mr. buehler you have a comment. >> good afternoon, commissioners i'm sorry to be late for this item i wanted to refer back to the discussion regarding compliance with the standards i agree with that interpretion there's a difference between contains and whether or not there's a significant impact, however, the recommendations of the sequa 12 and 13 and 16 are an effort to encourage good behavior with the secretary standards. in this gray area of compliance with the standards and significant adverse impact many

on the task force expressed concerns about the cost establishing whether or not there's a significant adverse impact if you don't comply with the standards. the example raised by sarah the demolition in the historic district this attempts to provide guidelines, however, there's no easy kind of rule of thumb percentage for example of buildings that must remain in the district to retain their eligibility and integrity. the members of the task force felt the safe harbor there is in terms of saving time for the sequa proposals >> thank you. commissioners any other questions >> i'm going to officially do public comment are there any

members of the public who wish to speak seeing none, public comment is closed. >> mr. fry. >> i'm up here to comical our comments if any and talking about moving forward on some of the elements or at least giving this periodic units. >> i'd like to hear from the fellow commissioners it sounds like we're addressed many issues we've got about a year before we come to a spot literally most of the stuff is going to be answered there's no item in full contention we're not moving forward towards so director ram. >> that's perhaps about the ar c but in terms of process improvements if i can use that term we owe you a couple of

schedules one for the local interpretation of the standards and one for the preservation bulletin 16. i would argue the latter before the foam and we'll lay out a schedule for periodic updates those are things we've tubed for a long time and there's frustration we're working on it we're working on it the stiff staff is playing catch but we owe you a schedule >> hr e chart a response that on that. i wanted to give a huge thank you for everybody that put in on this report to the folks plus the whole committee that is

unbelievably helpful to everybody the departments and sponsors everybody so thank you very much i really appreciate it. any other closing comments. seeing none, okay. this is our last item. okay. so we'll test test test.

>> good afternoon, welcome to our rules committee meeting for thursday, april 3. i am supervisor norman yee and i will be supervising this meeting. i am joined by supervisor kitty tang, supervisor is on his way. jennifer low and jessie larson, who record each of our meeting and make the transcripts available to the public online. so madam clerk, are there any announcements? >> please make sure to silence cell phones and any electronic devices. items acted upon today will appear on the april

15th board of supervisors agenda unless otherwise stated. >> i am glad to see all of you here today. i'm going to see if i can stall this for another 30 seconds to give supervisor campos a chance to make the sprint over here. would you like me to sing a song for you guys? i will get started. so

i know that -- on john ball? >> mr. chair, would you like me to call the item first? >> i'm sorry, madam clerk, item no. 1. >> item no. 1 is a motion confirming the appointment of john-paul samaha to the treasure island development authority board of directors. >> come on up. >> good afternoon, chairman yee, members of the board, my name is john-paul samaha and i request your support in my reappointment to the tida board. i've been on the tida board for 5 years, we are underdwoing and will be undergoing an expensive process of community building the next few years as the navy transitions the island over to the city. we currently have a thriving community of people

currently living on the island, we're going to have a very challenging process of transitioning to the new development. i have a background in both city planning and in public policy and i currently work in the private sector in real estate, so it is my hope that my contribution would be to ensure that whatever community we do build is one that is not only looking good on paper but actually that will be one that is affordable to residents both owners and renters and where we have all the public infrastructure being provided to make it a balanced self-sustaining new community in san francisco. and that is what i want to say and if you have any questions i'm happy to answer you. >> i will just -- i appreciated that i had the chance to speak with you prior to this meeting and really

appreciate your background and how that has really helped you in this role. so you did kind of speak to this before, but i typically ask applicants, he is sptionly if you are being reappointed, what are some of the things you hope to accomplish if you are reappointed to this position? >> thank you. i would like to make sure that we look at the details of, now that we get into the development details as we transition, hopefully we will be breaking ground on the first development next year. i just want to make sure as we enter this new phase that whatever is being developed is well thought out and well planned out and that we serve the real needs of our citizens and the new residents and the current residents, whether it's affordability issues, home owners dues, whether you are a rent or or you are an owner on

the island you will be paying fees associated with the infrastructure with parks and recreation, the new ferry terminal, transit fees, all this will have impact on livability and affordability on the island. hopefully my real world real estate experience will give some kind of -- will make a big contribution to making that more of like a real world type of process. >> so i'm just curious, not only you but the board under itself, what role are you taking monitoring, ensuring that the on-going clean up, i guess, is taking place and to

the most sensitive way to the residents. >> well, we oversee that process. i believe you may be speaking to the radioactive clean up. the navy, the state health agencies and our local health department are all working together to make sure that the clean up is one that is comprehensive and will alay the very real fear of the residents who are living on land that may or may not be contaminated. certainly we provide the forum and we oversee. we have great staff. mirian syres, who oversees the day-to-day running of the island, is doing a great job, not only oversee the clean up

and have a comprehensive clean up but make sure the current residents of the island are informed of the process, that every information that they need and must have that is to be made available to them. >> any other questions? seeing none, thank you very much. >> thank you so much. >> are there any public comments on this item? come on up. state your name if you like and two minutes. >> good afternoon, supervisors, eric brooks, representing san francisco green party and the local grass roots organization our city. recent news reports have made clear that there is much more going on with treasure island and radioactive contamination on treasure island than we previously believed. the navy has now finally, after many, many years of grass roots and

public pressure, finally agreed to examine every house on that island for radioactive contamination that they previously claimed was not there. and in light of the growing seriousness of news report after news report showing more and more how this island is in more danger and its resolution debts are in more danger than we thought, it's absolutely vital that you make sure that these appointees are willing to put a moratorium on activities on that island until the navy gets done with its studies and in my opinion until a full clean up to residential standards is done on that island and also --. >> so your time, can you address the item which is the appointment of this particular

individual to the board? >> right, so what i'm saying is --. >> no other issues right now. >> we need you to ask these applicants if they are willing to support a moratorium on activities on that island until these things are done and also consider what i think is going to be necessary and that is going to be an evacuation of the current residents of that island to safer places in san francisco on the mainland. we need to make places available. we need people on the treasure island development authority board that are willing to make those hard decisions and not just push development. thank you. >> thank you. any other public comments? suing -- seeing none, public item for this item is closed.

supervisor tang >> sure, i think mr. samaha has done a great job in his role so far and he also receives great support from sherry williams so i move forward his name out to the full board with recommendation. >> motion is passed. thank you for continuing to serve. >> item no. 2, motion confirming the appointment of vivian fei tsen to the treasure island authority board of directors. >> hi, vivian. >> chairman yee, supervisor tang, supervisor campos, my name is fei tsen and you just recently saw me because i was appointed to the tida board last november and i was serving the last few months of the previous director's term and i am here for reappointment to the tida board. so i am the youngest newest member of the

tida board. there are many issues of course that are facing the development of treasure island and certainly the mediation of the toxins that the navy produced in times that they were supervising the island, that needs to be taken care of. and there is many challenges in terms of the infrastructure, in terms of the transportation to and from the island, in terms of the vision for that island and for the housing development that will occur. my background is actually in urban planning and urban development and i have broad experience working with brown fields that have been turned into multiple uses and i hope that i can be of service to the city with my background and be on this commission.

if there are any questions i'll be glad to answer them. >> any questions? nice seeing you again, seems like you were here yesterday. >> right. >> i know you are relatively new but i'd like to ask you this question. not long ago there was a fire at the dock or something. i was wondering if the board had discussed, it may have been discussed before you got there, but somehow there was no -- am i treading into something i shouldn't be? there was no procedures to check whether people that leased the dock to boats would have insurance or not. do you know if there's been procedures

put in to make sure that everybody that rents dock space would have insurance? >> yes, i'm not aware of the exact event that you are talking about, i think that was before my time. but i do know that there is a lease agreement with the users of the facilities and in that lease agreement there should be provisions for insurance but certainly i will check into that in particular. but it would be unusual if the insurance requirements were not part of that user lease agreement. >> i think the requirement was also there, but the procedure to check whether one has the insurance --. >> yes, i will do that. >> -- was not very strong. i would love it if the board would look into good procedures to make sure everything is checked off. >> i certainly will do that. >> seeing no other questions, any public comments on this

matter? >> good afternoon again, supervisors, eric brooks, san francisco green party and our city, san francisco. i just want to just tag my comments on the previous applicant and just encourage you that if you approve these applicants, which it appears you probably will and you may have very good reasons for doing that, i would appreciate you pursuing their tenure on the board and the rest of the board's decisions at treasure island with diligence as you just did with this boat insurance issue so that these matters of the radioactive and other contamination on the island are properly veted so that we're protecting the citizens that currently live on that island and the citizens that may live there in the future. thank you. >> any other public comments on this matter? seeing