we won't see a cost elevation. >> i don't know if i can answer our entire question by the way we're planning with the mayor's office on disability to create a form that identifies the modifications and i'm working closely with our historic planners to make that form very clear to be identified as a historic property and having training with all departmental staff that staff the counter so our i don't know if that helps to answer the question. >> i guess i was just asking two examples including the redemption of delores park but the public and private we've seen dramatic delays for things getting stuck with dramatic cost escalation

like rec and park they're not spending the money on the park because of the delay a lot of homeowners he imagine with people with disabilities they carton afford the delays i want to stress this think an important issue many making sure that people are able to navigate that process quickly so supervisor cowen if i could have a motion to forward item 3 to the full board with a positive recommendation. >> so moved. >> we'll take that without objection. that will be the order thank you madam clerk call item 5. >> item open is an ordinance amending the planning code for the zoning for awning canopies

and marquis. >> this is an ordinance i authored and i don't know they all happy to conversion on today i guess this legislation for the first time in a long time updates the city's sign controls regulation is important to keep our residential neighborhoods and corridor aesthetically free of visual bright legislation was supported unanimously by the planning department and the small business commission i want to thank our assemblyman david chiu for his work on this legislation before he left to go to sacramento generally for existing businesses this legislation will not change the controls but for locations that closed down for 6 months between attendants the signs for that business including the awnings when the something like that, etc. need to be you i didn't want to be in conformity with

the controls that helps to insure that awning are clean and safe and our corridors are not clustered and windows to the street are not unnecessarily obtaining occurred this makes sure the billboard companies are not mass raiding as signs there were billboard companies one in particular that were exploiting a will that in the planning code to say they were a business sign but really be a billboard the voters amazing over and over again not to allow new blldz in san francisco we were able to close that billboard through the interim controls we're making permanence i want to offer one amendment to this piece of legislation made by the planning commission to amend the planning

controls to allow for business signage to be more higher than 50 feet of grade i believe it will be unstriking page 16 line 12 and 13 if i'm not mistaken let me know if i miss stated that we'll fact that amendment up after public comment and aaron starr will provide the perceiving briefing. >> aaron starr the manager of legislative affairs it consolidates dings and modifies it the definition the business signs be removed when the business cease operation and prohibits the general signage and places more restrictions around union square and other neighborhood you

commercial district this ordinance was originally part of the larger northeast legislation that was introduced by supervisor chiu in 2011 that is the last piece of legislation to be considered by the board because of the ordinance ordinance sighed size it was heard the signs were continued in phase one at the march first hearing the commission voted 7 to zero with the northeast ordinance and the two modifications exclude the amendment that supervisor wiener just talked about and thelogically the sign from one hundred to 60 feet and consider expanding the property legislation so changing the copy color or logo on the sign we brought into code compliance not in this ordinance but it wasn't part of it to begin with anyway

and that concludes my racks i'm happy to answer any questions you may have. >> thank you very much mr. star we'll on item i on to public comment we have one public comment card tom. >> good afternoon, supervisors tom executive director of liveable city we're very much in support of this ordinance and helped to work on it for 4 years it's been moving forward i said to speak to the amendment and say i'm omitted to the amendment amendment will allow business items up to one hundred feet in height when they were done in the late 60s it was up to 60 feet that's a 6 foot high on the wide it street district in the

rest of c-3 it can be up to one hundred feet in height for a sign is unnecessary all the rules and generally speaking the policies of the planning department for the last few decades have been about dignifying the pedestrian street scale and bringing our pedestrian level no something like that needs to be one hundred feet high 2, 3, 4 any of the districts those are dominant and dominate the architecture and less light because they'll wish expending up to downtown it is mixed use and more so as we've added more and more folks and there will be more bright from the increase of signs keeping the - the other thing

that's confusing we got an e-mail on the sign height and an indication of the department they thought 60 feet was a good height i don't know where this is coming from it shouldn't be done i don't want to also in the market street sign district we've struck out the height sign there and the 60 sheet in the upper market ice that raise it - >> to the planning department in terms of i don't think there are buildings that are one hundred feet tall but can you comment on the last comment. >> i'm not sure what the e-mail was but i know that we've heard concerns from developers downtown they want signs on top

of they're building this is one thousand feet to people that don't want people with signs 0 above 10 feet so the exit one hundred foot is a good balance between the popular opts and this was heard at the time the commission recommended that you keep the one hundred feet in the ordinance and since then a - you know public discourse and conversation on that so we're a little bit redundant to see that go down to 60 feet. >> in terms of the comments that tom made perhaps when this comes down to the board could i get perhaps a response. >> on the i'm sorry repeat. >> on the reference inform

upper market. >> it's a little bit i think the tallest building is 85 feet. >> (inaudible) it's the market street sign on octavia boulevard (inaudible). >> it seems struck out. >> okay. great thank you very much and thank you okay is there any additional public comment on item 5 seeing none, public comment is closed. so in terms of the one hundred feet versus the 60 feet frankly i don't have a strong opinion one way or the other the planning commission recommended not taken one hundred feet and mr. star elaborated on that i'm going to oppose the amendment and to the full board colleagues are interested in changing that concluding the supervisors that represent e 3 something we can

take up at the phone number but today i'll recommend he put the amendment in so the amendment as i described before public comment can we take that without objection? the amendment is adapt can i have a motion to recommend this to the full board without objection >> 1:30 we'll take that without objection. that's the order. >> madam clerk call item 6. >> item 67 angle ordinance amending the platt for the landmarked building. >> and supervisor cohen is the author of item 6. >> thank you very much colleagues this changes the planning code to limit the amount of says that a building is allowed to convert once it's designated a historic landmark the board of supervisors amazing passes interim controls i put

230rg9 to establish is a element of the conversions of pdr to office spates in historic building last year the controversy of labor its 2 henry adams brought this to my taken into consideration attention in this case, the project sponsor tried to convert a two-story building and during this the process of the proposal i've asked the planning department to take a comprehensive look at the buildings in the ear and as a result, the planning department said there's 14 other buildings in the pdr one v and pdr one g as in girl distinct that is disbelieve for the landmark designation now prior to the interim controls those were allowed to convert one hundred percent of the space into office

eir revenue if their displaying tenants this costs one million expedite of space and the interim controls we passed last year limits the space that the historic will be able to convert by establishing new floor controls i have a number of proposed amendments that codify the various u various changes and represents we've developed larger in concussion with the historic preservation commission and those excludes there's 3 of them first ring with the harmonies of liberty; the conditional use authorization for the conversion and second requiring a historic structures report be submitted to the historic preservation commission detailing the specific the physical interventions needed and their

stemmed cost and feinstein amendments requiring the planning commission to consider the historic structures report the economic need for the building and the compatibility of office space with pdr tenants and any other impacts on the neighborhoods or is location plans for the tenants i know that's a mouth full i believe that we have sorry steve with the planning department to say a few words about this item why don't you come up steve. >> steve with the planning department just to reflect on that the hearings with the historic preservation commission we had two and during the hearings we really no concern or fight over the jest of the policy that is reich the conversion of pdr space in those landmark buildings that was full support only raise by the ar c

how do they know the buildings are they need so much office space to support the 2 henry adams this is a building that's in excellent condition why put a building there the purpose of the location to prove the historic nature so we proposed to the planning department with the supervisor cohen and staff a bunch of amendments which were read and the hpc voted to support the amendments so they'll have a change both commissions and hpc for it's historic landmark and the conditional use process to insure that the hpcs concerns were heard and the office was meeting other economic criteria. >> thank you. >> thank you. >> we're ready for public

comment. >> yes. we're ready for public comment. >> any public comment on item 6 seeing none, public comment is closed. >> supervisor cohen. >> i have a few closing remarks thank you to you and your department staff i believe the legislation does a good job of striking a balance of allowing office support and the maintenance of those historic buildings without displacing tenants or cannibalizing the wblgz we need to maintain some of the incentives that the property think owned have to allow them to have office space in special circumstances we can't lieu the can onlytion of truly value and could have at the time space so you've heard

this is this is essential to our blue-collar jobs and not adding this in his own the work we've done to support the businesses in this city i move we adapt those because their substantive we need to put this off one week. >> we'll take the amendments with a positive recommendation and what date and february 2nd. >> no, i thought oh, watt wait. >> it's february 2nd not the 9th and okay. so the motion so continue item of one week to february 2nd without objection the item is continued. >> madam clerk call our final item 7. >> the ordinance rezoning a

partial on portland avenue. >> and supervisor campos is the author of item 7 and we'll call up aaron starr from the planning department. >> me didn't this rezones 16 hundred cortland the commercial manufacturing to pdr one g this is the last property to be zoned the article 2 you've voted on that talks about the planning code this was supposed to be part of superintendant maxwell home improvement introduced in 2010 to the clerical error it was left off the zoning it was heard on december 4th they've voted unanimously to recommend approval. >> thank you very much is there any public comment on item 7. >> seeing none, public comment is closed can i have a motion to forward

24 is to the full board with a positive recommendation. >> making a lot of motions. >> yes so moved. >> we'll take that without objection. that will be the order and before we adjourn today, i just want to note that this will be my final meeting as chair of the land use committee i've had the honor of chairing this committee for two years now and severed on it for 4 years in the running and for 3 of the four years i've that the pleasure of serving with my colleague supervisor cohen that will be stepping into the chairmanship next monday meeting and look forward to work together with the 3 members of the me those will not change and supervisor jane kim will remain under and we'll be in the if you fabulous leadership supervisor cohen

madam clerk, any other business before this committee? >> there's no further business. >> then we're adjourned everyone

>> the renovation of balboa park the oldest in the city of san francisco, and now it is the newest part in the city of san francisco.

through our partnership, and because of public investment from the two thousand eight fund, we are celebrating a renewal and an awakening of this park. we have it safer, happier more joyous. >> 3, 2, 1 [laughter] =--[applause] >> it is a great resource for families, to have fun in the city, recreation. >> this is an amazing park. we have not revitalized it without public and private investment. the critical piece of the process of this renovation was that it was all about the

community. we reached out to everyone in this community. we love this park dearly and they all had thoughts and ideas and they wanted to bring their own creativity and their personality to bear on the design. what you see is what the community wanted. these ideas all came from the residents of this community. as a result, there is a sense of ownership, pride and responsibility that goes along with what is going to be an exciting park.

. >> a hi, i'm karen fry a project manager and sfpuc and the bureau of environmental management honestly i've not considered a public sector job i realized this was an opportunity to work on large capital projects from san francisco all the way to our hetch hetchy and the yosemite national park i work with engineers and city attorneys and scheduled and we all work tom nolan e together on the project. >> the excavations are in red we'll have the interference to go under the street. >> my next project is the largest project in the water system improvement program this is the southeast plan that involved a lot of kworpthsdz with the community groups and

public when 9 commissioners such the planning commission and the board of supervisors or this ftc commission they help us in city hall this is a beautiful building it really is the inner workers of the building you feel you're in the heart of government and it's exciting to be part of that

>> ♪ ♪ we are definitely pioneers in airport concession world a world of nationally if not entirely or internationally >> everybody is cop us right now. >> the people that were in charge of the retail this is where that began. >> i didn't think we would have a location at the airport. >> we've set the bar higher with the customer commerce. >> telling me about the operator and how you go about finding them and they get from being in the city to being in the airport. >> so first, we actually find a

table and once we know what we want a sit-down we go to the neighborhoods in san francisco and other people seminary of the retail let us know about the rain water and are excited to have the local operators in the airport. >> we have to go going through the conceive selective process and they award a lease to the restaurant. >> they are planning on extending. >> we that you could out the china and the length evens and the travel serve and fourth your minds and it's all good. >> how long for a vendor to move through the process. >> i would say it could take 80 up to a year from the time we go out to bid until they actually

open a restaurant. >> i don't know what we signed up for but the airport is happy to have us here. and, you know, even taking out the track simple things there's a learning curve >> with once we're here they are helpful. >> it's an award-winning program. >> we're prude of your awards we have won 11 awards the latest for the best overall food address beverage program and . >> like the oscars (laughter). >> the professional world. >> tell me about the future food. >> all the sb national leases are xooirz and we're hoping to bring newer concepts out in san francisco and what your passengers want. >> well, i look forward to the future (laughter) air are we look fo

>> good afternoon welcome. welcome to the board of supervisors meeting of january 27 2015. mr. clerk can you please call the roll. >>