supervisor camposs position on the second one as well. >> so the first recommendation is to modify section d one c that's the machining golf course and strike out bowling alleys and put other uses that don't require a permit. that was added because those types of uses this are poetry recitals and live music performances other types of uses that are typically clued if the uses. way - >> away was 0 it to add the language for the miniature golf. >> supervisor wiener's ideas to board even it.

>> to one in case another use wants to open up it will allow that without another ordinance and the definitions. >> what did you say about poetry recitals. >> the other entertainment is other uses and i think anytime that you do serve amplified sounds you need a place of entertainment permit. >> poetry was with amplified sound. >> yes. >> it would not be permitted with under our modification the idea was to take anti things that require places of entertainment predicament to narrow the types of entertainment. >> so a poetry recital i use the microphones you'll fall into

the general requirements the alcoholic beverages and hoping there's other ways to serve beer or wine. >> you wouldn't be able to have a poetry recital use a place that only does poetry retilt i silt with the restaurant and serve acholic beverages. >> that's ridiculous how those controls are. >> mr. chairman, i - and we've loud the alcoholic has b there been my crime incidents what's the trend i know that urban puts has been open for a while but what about other businesses we've allowed alcohol.

>> i'm not having the information with me. >> there's a good neighbor policys that are connected with the code and that would be helpful for me to know if the businesses have been boyd by the good neighbor policies and the last thing i support is legislation and i think the planning commission suggestions as well. i think that upper put and other businesses are benefits to neighborhoods but as they work with the neighbors to make sure that the families and especially children have access during the daytime hours but also their hopefully listening to the miniature golf inside is goes to 12 or a.m. and it protects the

folks from allowing alcohol where the urban put is. it would be good to get the information about my crime reports if the expansion from the theatre and the mission bowl that would be helpful to me >> sure. >> okay. can i - mr. chair can i make a motion >> i want to move with we amend item 4 to adopt the first recommendation. >> i'll second. >> okay. >> supervisor and john gibner, deputy city attorney just before you act on this motion this amendment would not require going back to planning but require continuance in the committee before what we go

forward. >> okay. so there's another motion and can we take that without objection. >> can i have a motion okay. we have to resend it now we're going to open up for public comment any public comment on that item on item 4. seeing none, public comment is closed. and so there is a motion i'll make a motion as indicated before and we'll take that without objection. on the amendment can i get a motion to continue item 4 by one week >> so moved. >> thank you madam clerk call item 5. >> the ordinance rerep ordinance and adapting a housing

element. >> okay. so on item 5 which is come from the planning department is here. >> hello so good afternoon supervisor wiener and supervisor mar and supervisor cowen i'm from the plaintiff i'm here to present the 2009 adapt by planning commission and recommended to you more approval. the how are you element is one of 7 elements from the general plan it's a long term comprehensive plan for the city and county of san francisco >> the housing law by the housing community development requires that local governments meet the low and low income residents for the housing

elements. the 2009 element was approved to meet the states basic requirements and also with the input of community members that includes specific issues like neighborhood character and infrastructure to support the growth. the housing element provides the background for the housing decisions and the public for the meeting the cities goals. the housing element provides the fraction for future decisions and oils the programs for the objectives and the policies. adaptation of the housing element didn't modify the land use regulation for the bulk limits nor suggests specific controls for specific neighborhoods it didn't add changes to the zoning map my such changes requires the

community outreach as well as hearings by the planning commission and the board of supervisors. in march of 2011 the plaintiff presented the element to the planning commission and it was adapted by the board of supervisors. we're here to present the same housing element by a lawsuit to challenge the 2004 and 2009 element eir and the adaptation of the 2009 element. the court ordered the city to set aside it and reconsider the housing elements. in response to this it was done by analyze and circulated to the community. the revised eir was certified on april 2014 and based on that the planning commission recommended

the adaptation of the 2009 elements. the planning commission continues to remedy the adaptation of the element as the housing element of the general plan the 2009 was developed in coordination with the mayor's office. the commission found that the 2009 element balances the courts values including the prioritization of the housing and the recognition of the housing character and the jobs transportations infrastructure and the city's roll as a sustainable model for rolls. its consistent with the planning code sections and was developed in coordination with the general policies. analysis of the policies is determined in the hoosiers element. the commission recommends the housing element adaptation

according to the lay and it helps our decade for the community development continue our eligibility for state and community and infrastructure fund and this is particularly important because of the mayor's office directive for the affordable housing. and will allow the city to begin the process for the development of the 2014 element that is due to the state no matter january 15th and it is recommended to be adapted. that concludes my presentation. >> thank you very much colleagues, any questions or comments regarding item 5. okay in that case we'll open item 5 for. and i have two cards. (calling names) >> good afternoon, supervisors.

i'm kathy. i'm an attorney representing san franciscans for liveable neighborhoods the appellant in this case. we're here because the superior court of san francisco found that the city violated the requirement of the california virtual quality act about when it approved the final impact report for the 2004 and 2009 plan because the analysis of alternatives in the eir was conclusionary and not supported by fax and the finding rejecting the finding were conclusionary the court ordered the approval of the housing element set aside for the reasons stated in san franciscans reliveable comments submitted to the decision and

the planning commission on our appeal to the board of supervisors for the eir certification we respectfully oppose the housing element because the deficiencies have not be occurred and their unsupported by fax as are the proposed finding. as an example faeflt a was defined as subject to all the area plans where 95 percent of the growth is expected by i eir says the housing will be dispursued because of the resident policy by the way, the majority of policy will be directed to the housing makes no sense so because of the time limps we don't have 07, 8, 9 to present it we oppose the project

respectfully and go forward with our appeal to the certification of the board. i assume that concludes the time >> we'll have that sequa appeal at the board of supervisors. thank you >> thank you. >> sir. >> can i have the overhead. age after beauty. i represent san francisco tomorrow we support the appeal of the san franciscans for the neighbors. the fact we're number one in the nation and the cost of housing construction is due to the lack of an efficient active problematic and enforceable housing element. those are indicated by the fact that the city is allowed

discretion for the affordability but not the interpretation of the states mandate for what is required in the housing elements. it's inconsistent with what is required in terms of the internal alignment with the general plan and with proposition m that requires a neighborhood be affordable and preserve neighborhood character it doesn't acknowledge the fact it has 50 thousand unit high-end in the pipeline and effectively on the scariest cities resources like you land affordability and costs and service programs it denies that the prop m has standing over the people over the board of supervisors.

it's therefore i sustain that it is an abuse even if power an abuse of power to the continuation because it makes the board come polite as well as the officers of the court thank you for your attention send it back >> bay here's the law your avoiding. >> thank you, ms. hill son. >> good afternoon, supervisors of the land use committee the eir doesn't adequately consider the feasible faechlts one to maintain the density limits to protect the neighborhood character it was dish and not krethd e corrected in the vesting process it was not evaluated with the advisory committee and not subject to the

eir draft period the june 2010 draft is a feasible alternative that will help with the rh1 and rh2 neighborhoods the 2009 housing elements will produce more housing elements and over the market rate housing it's contrary to the allocation the 2009 housing element has a significant impact on transit. transit is over capacity and streets are congested in the central and eastern neighborhood. this is nonresponsive to comments thank you for your time >> thank you is there any further public comment on item 5? seeing none, public comment is closed. thank everyone that came out today and colleagues, we have a

pending appeal at the board of supervisors so we'll need to forward this without re78gs because we can't act on it until the sequa appeal has been resolved. supervisor mar >> yeah. i wanted to ask is it ms. missouri hand i know we've this has been before land use before every what is is every four or five years i have a question about neighborhood concerns. i know in the housing element an package 37 issue 6 there's a stated goal to maintain the unique character of the san francisco neighborhood the mayors has a huge goal to meet the inner city housing could you walk us though how united states community has a say in projects that move forward according to

our housing units especially protecting and middle-income and how we maintain the character >> so i think i said in my opening remarks this is the cities vision and anytime we do my in depth work that is for a planning effort so we what we address neighborhood character or work in areas we don't have the planning we'll work with the board of supervisors before any legislation occurs. >> it's my understanding this is not a blanket approval but there's a process for individual environmental reviews and you're saying a general vision and goals of our housing needs in the city? >> yes. that's correct. >> thank you. thank you supervisor mar.

any other questions or comments colleagues. okay could i get a motion to forward item 5 to the full board without recommendation >> we will we'll take that without objection.. madam clerk, any other business before this commission? >> there's no further business. >> then we are adjourned.

>> welcome to the meeting. >> do we have any announcements? >> completed speaker cards and completed of the documents to be included as part of the files should be submitted to the clerk and the items acted upon today will be on the june tenth board of supervisors agenda, unless otherwise stated. could you call item one? >>resolution retroactively authorizing the department of public health to accept and expend a grant in the amount of $1,751,827 from mental health

services oversight and accountability commission to participate in a program entitled mental health triage personnel grant for the period of april 1, 2014, through june 30, 2014, waiving indirect costs. >> >> okay, thank you. allison? is it from dph, thanks for being here with us. >> thank you, nice to be here. >> so, we will just go ahead? >> yes. >> we received a grant from the mental health substance abuse for a little bit over, 16 million over four years, four million per year but it is prorated and this is to establish a crisis triage response system for the city and county of san francisco, mostly focused on children and family. and the reasons for that, are that we are finding that we have a number of families and children, who are coming to ers and to the psych emergency rooms, san francisco general, and to be evaluated and stabilized for crisis services and the emergencies and those are really not the best places

for children and family to be treated. and we are hoping that this grant will provide us with alternatives where we can stabilize the children in the community and we are also looking at a facility at the edge wood children service to establish the crisis unit, where there will be two hospital deversion beds and the capability to do something called the 23 hour stabilization unit where we will try to stabilize the children there, this way they are in the county and the families will have access to them and this is a proven more effective way to deal with these emergencies. and there is also, a crisis triage teams that will go into the communities that will try to stabilize the children in

the natural environment, >> we don't have a budget analyst report yet, so we are going to take public comment first, anyone that wishes to comment on item one? how about a song? >> yeah. ♪

>> welcome to san francisco, everyone, anyone else wish to comment on item one? >> seeing none, public comment is closed. do we have a motion to move this forward without recommendation? >> okay we can take that without objection. >> could you call item two? >>resolution retroactively authorizing the department of public health to accept and expend a grant in the amount of $2,663,405 from the state of california to participate in a program entitled "hiv care program/single allocation model" for the period of april 1, 2014, through march 31, 2015; and waiving indirect costs. >> thank you, mr. goodwin? >> yes. >> thanks for being here.

>> good mornings, supervisor and this item before you, is the part b dollars that are allocated by her passed on to the state and this is an annual recurring grant that sustains the hiv system of care. and the state office of aids in sacramento allocates the part b dollars to the county and health jurisdictions based on health and other factors we have not yet received our 2014, ryan white part b or the state office of aids award letter for this year, but we anticipate it in the next week or two, and the amount before you is based on last year's award that is given in three year amounts. and may adjust to go down a little bit this year. >> okay. thank you. >> supervisors? >> okay. we will open this up to public comment, anyone wish to comment on item two?

>> ♪ ♪ >> thank you. >> i am just questioning whether we have any board policies against duets in the board chambers. >> public comment is closed. motion to move forward with recommendation. >> okay. >> we have a motion to move this forward and take it without objection. >> clerk could you call item three? >>resolution retroactively

authorizing the department of public health to accept and expend a grant in the amount of $1,000,000 from centers for disease control and prevention to participate in a program entitled "capacity building for high-impact hiv prevention, category a" for the period of april 1, 2014, through march 31, 2015. >> thanks. >> good morning, supervisors i'm director jonathan and i am the director of learning and innovation at the department of public health and it is a pleasure to be here on behalf and representing the successful grant application, as you mentioned and the over arching goal of the long standing cdc program, out of the grant is to fund the organizations that have the ability to offer the state of the science information and the proper training and the technical assistance. here in san francisco, as we have work to know and we have seen a sustained reduction in the hiv infections and a scale up of hiv testing experts and linking them into care and initiation of retroviral

therapy and suppression of levels and undetective levels and helpth of those living with hiv and can help to prevent the transmission. allowing us to establish a national program, in the workforce to help the health departments plan and implement the sustain able interventions and strategy and we are funded to offer the capacity building services in three areas of high impact hiv prevention, testing and prevention for high risk persons and policy, and on-line learning and networking as well as approaches to trained staff and to offer the technical assistance and through the process we hope to be able to share the lessons learned and allow us to glean the important lessons to others who do the

great work around the country and help us to implement the strategies here in san francisco and so we are proud and excited to begin this new program, do you have any questions that you have? and answer them. >> any questions? >> okay. budget analyst report as well. and so we will open this up to public comment, anyone wishes to comment on item three? >> ♪ >> thank you, anyone else went to comment on item on item three? >> seeing none, it public comment is closed we can take it without objection. >> item four? >>resolution authorizing the san francisco municipal transportation agency to

execute advanced train control system contract with thales transport & security, inc., for design and construction of advanced train control system for the central subway project for amount not to exceed $21,363,292 for a 1,700 day term, to commence upon board approval. (municipal transportation agency) . >> okay, thank you. the mta is presenting on this item? >> yes. good morning supervisor farrell and avalos i am the deputy planning director, and i am here to request for both supervisor authorization for smta, and to enter into agreement with the transport and security to implement the design and the advanced training for the central subway, and with the authorization of this contract, we will be allowed to have operatebility between the consist ans of the subway and the system and this contract will design and implement and install, and test,