thank you item 11 items for future meetings there anybody? have any items they want to suggest to the staff for future meetings there being no public here the public has no suggestions i understand and item 12 i'll entertain a motion to adjourn >> so moved. >> all in favor, say i. i. >> meeting's adjourned

>> a way of life in san francisco. when the next major quake hits, the city hopes a new law requiring seismic upgrades to five story buildings will help keep more residents safe and sound. tell me a little about the soft story program. what is it? >> it's a program the mayor signed into law about a year

and a half ago and the whole idea behind it was to help homeowners strengthen buildings so that they would not collapse. >> did you the soft story program apply to all buildings or building that were built in a certain time frame? >> it only applies to buildings built in the time frame of 1978 and earlier. it's aimed at wood framed buildings that are three or more stories and five or more units. but the openings at the garage level and the street level aren't supported in many buildings. and without the support during a major earthquake, they are expected to pancake and flatten ~. many of the buildings in this program are under rent control so it's to everybody's advantage to do the work and make sure they protect their investment and their tenant. >> notices have gone out to

more than 6,000 owners of potentially at-risk properties but fewer than one-third have responded and thousands might miss an important deadline in september to tell the city what they plan to do. let's talk worst case scenario. what happens in a collapse? >> buildings have the tendency of rolling over. the first soft story walls lean over and the building collapse. in an earthquake the building is a total loss. >> can you describe what kind of strengthening is involved in the retrofit? >> one of the basic concepts, you want to think of this building kind of like rubber band and the upper three floor are very rigid box and the garage is a very flexible element. in an earthquake the garage will have a tendency to rollover. you have to rubber band analogy that the first floor is a very tough but flexible rubber band such that you never drive force he to the upper floors. where all your damage goes into

controlled element like plywood or steel frame. >> so, here we are actually inside of a soft story building. can we talk a little about what kinds of repairs property owners might expect? >> it's a very simple process. we deliberately tried to keep it that way. so, what's involved is plywood, which when you install it and make a wall as we have done here already, then you cover it with this gypsum material. this adds some flexibility so that during the earthquake you'll get movement but not collapse. and that gets strengthened even more when we go over to the steel frame to support the upper floor. >> so, potentially the wood and the steel -- it sounds like a fairly straightforward process takes your odds of collapse from one in 4 to one in 30?

>> that's exactly right. that's why we're hoping that people will move quickly and make this happen. >> great. let's take a look. so, let's talk steel frames. tell me what we have going on here. >> well, we have a steel frame here. there are two of these and they go up to the lower floor and there is a beam that go across, basically a box that is much stiffer and stronger. ~ goes so that during the earthquake the upper floor will not collapse down on this story. it can be done in about two weeks' time. voila, you're done. easy. >> for more information on how to get your building earthquake ready,

>> good afternoon, everyone. welcome to the san francisco's board of supervisor's meeting of february 24, 2015 where we are celebrating black history month today. madam clerk, can you please call the role. >> yes madam president. supervisor avalos. avalos present. breed. >> here. >> breed present. campos. campos present. christian ten. >> present. >> cohen present. supervisor farrell. >> here. >> farrell present. supervisor kim. kim present. supervisor mar. >> present. >> present. supervisor cheng. >> cheng present. >> yee. >> present. >> madam president, all members are present. >> thank you ladies and gentlemen, can you please join me in the pledge of allegiance.

[pledge of allegiance]. >> thank you. colleagues, are there any changes to the january 13th board meeting minutes? seeing no changes is there a motion to approve the minutes? motion by supervisor mar, seconded by supervisor farrell. madam clerk, are there any objections to the approval of the minutes? seeing none, the minutes are approved uunanimously pending public comments. are there any communications? >> i have two communications associated with two separate items on today's agenda. item

21 and 27 through 30 dhl be read and considered when the two items are called madam president. >> thank you. and madam clerk, can you read the consent's agenda. >> item's one and two, these items are considered routine. if a member objects, an item may be removed. >> are there any members who would like to severe items for consent? see none, madam clerk, approximate please call the roll. >> kim. >> yie. >> tang. >> yeah. >> yee. >> yeah. >> avalos. >> yeah. >> supervisor breed. >> yeah. >> campos. >> yeah. >> campos yeah. christian ten. >> yeah.

>> there are 11yeas. these are approved. >> a legacy business registry and authorize a $50 administrative fee. >> can we take this item, same house, same call? seeing no objection, this is passed on the same reading. madam clerk, can you please call item number four. >> item four is a resolution to authorize the general manager of the public utilities commission to execute a one to the water program agreement for additional management services associated with the henry tracy associated plant with hdr engineering and to increase the agreement amount for a total not to exceed the amount of 18 million pursuant to charter section 9.118. >> same house, same call. seeing no objection, this

resolution is adopted unanimously. madam clerk can you please call the next item. >> item five is a resolution to authorize the tax collector to sell at tax auction certain parcels of reality and real mrorpt. >> same house, same call. without objection, this is adopted unanimously. >> item six is to authorize the department of public health to accept and extend two legal and one large transit shuttle vehicles for the elderly at la guna hospital center. >> same house. same call. without objection, this is adopted unanimously. next item, please. >> item receive know is a resolution to authorize the park department to apply for a housing parks program grant in the amount not to exceed 3 million.

>> same house, same call. without objection, this resolution is adopted unanimously. next item, please. >> item eight, a resolution to declare the extent to reimburse certain proceeds of the mayor's office of housing in community development to submit an application and related documents to the california debt limit allocation committee and to prevent the issuance of res unanimous consent bond not to exceed 200 million. >> supervisor cohen. >> thank you, very much. i've articulated some concerns i have in the budget and finance committee hearing last week. but for the benefit of the rest of my colleagues, i want to share with you just a little bit of background information about this proposed project. now this project has been proposed and it's very controversial. i've been personally involved with this

item the last two years. working with the neighborhood and project sponsors in a dialogue about how to shape the community. >> how to shape the project? >> how to shape the project so it compliments or benefits our community. i've already addressed some concerns i have to the test run as well as to the mayor's office. my concerns mainly center around the process and the perception of this board of supervisors. this is a project that is currently under going environmental reviews. the draft e i r was just issued in december. this project has many months of entitlements and community zugsz ahead of it. and we don't yet know where it will end up or what this project will look like at the end of the process. we don't even know if the is density of the blight will remain the same or if it will be rental property.

typically, test for actions comes to us after a project has been approved or at least after the sequel coverage. given the cocontroversial nature of this project, i have a real concern by the board of supervisors to apply for bond financing sends the wrong message to the public particularly signaling that we are prejudging its merits, this project's merits and expressing an opinion on it of the unit counts by this site by passing sequel. i also had a conversation with them about how serious they are about the 20 percent of housing. they said assured to me that they are willing to do the 20 percent of the project. but there's nothing in this ruling

that obligates them to do that. so we very well may end up in a position where we have after the project prior to see quota and send the wrong message to the community and we still don't end up with affordable housing of 20 percent onsite. i have already made a note to the mayor to make sure we don't end up in this position again. it does address the issue again. if this project is entitled and i do mean if, i want to have as much affordable housing as possible. i do not want it at the expense of the fair process for our neighborhood. so i'm not able to support this resolution today. so colleagues, i do want to share with you the lopsidedness of the housing

process. but those are really critical to remember what we're communicating to the focuses of neighborhood in what is happening with the affordable housing in the city. we do have few projects doing that with the housing program when we are in the housing crisis. however, we do not want to give an image that we are for going with the project. that's my position and where i'm standing. i will be voting no on this. back to you madam chair >> thank you. supervisor mar. >> i know at the budget committee, there was a good zuchlthz i appreciate supervisor cohen's comments. i want to ask if middle brook can comment on the project. i know it's 316 units on site below market rate. david is here as

i recall. it's a mixed project in the area of the city that needs more housing. but i'm wondering if you can talk about the on site below market rate unit? >> thank you for the opportunity to speak a moment. the project itself is still in the very early stages of review. it's still under sequel review as supervisor cohen mentioned. today, it's solely about the financing of the proposed project. this resolution would allow the project to seek financing with the allocation. and if that financing is used for the project, there is a requirement that 20 percent of the units be provided as affordable units. that's more than what is required for the under lying zoning with that project in that district which requires 14.6 percent. if they go ahead

with the on site, we will meet a number of affordable onsite units. including the architecture and the environment in-text is still under review. i want people to be clear that that review is under way. the project can be modified, the project can be approved or disapproved. if this is used, we will get 20 percent affordable onsite. >> thank you. supervisor tang. >> thank you. i was onsite as well and i want to see if our deputy attorney can share with us what we shared with us in committee as well which is the process. i know that concerns have been raised about the order of things happening and so if he could just reiterate what you told us in budget committee. >> sure. the questions in budget as to what supervisor

cohen mentioned about sequel, the question is is it appropriate to adopt this resolution today even though the sequel review isn't final for this project? the answer is yes. there will be further approval that are come back to the board on the following sequel review and that's when you will take formal action to move forward with the project. this is just essentially a preliminarily step that doesn't require advanced sequel review. >> thank you. any other questions supervisor tang? okay. supervisor content. >> okay. i just want to ask clarifying questions as well. i also sponsored with the mayor's office, a similar measure a couple of weeks ago regarding what is known as the good will site in district six.

it's also a resolution to declare the county in the city to reimburse certain expenditures. now the project is certainly farther or actually more behind than i believe the 1601 mayor street project is further behind. i just want to clarify that this has been practiced before and also to ask why the timing of this takes place before we go through any environmental review and project approvals. thank you again. >> this is sofay from the mayor's office of housing. that is true, the same process occurred at the so-called good will site. and the timing really depends on the negotiation of the site acquisition. there are -- you have 60 days after site acquisition in which to get the resolution such as the one

before you today. and during thatif you get the resolution, then you can include the cost of site acquisition in what is eligible through the bond financing. you have a good time frame and this is why it's going in the sequel review. again, i will stress that this does not at all impact the sequel review or title review. if you would like more information about that, please feel free to ask questions. >> no, i think it's important to clarify because i know so many of us wouldn't support moving forward because there's so many questions with the project and what the project will look like. there is so many reviews and the project will come back before the board before we make the determination. so voting on this today doesn't catch us on a specific type of project and the number of units, et cetera,

is that correct? >> that is correct. and further, if the financing is used, this requires the project sponsor to provide the 20 percent onsite which is an increase. >> right. okay. thank you for the clarification. i just have to say the building of housing is definitely a priority to the city but certainly the production of affordable housing is a very important priority for this city, the board, and also the mayor's office. i just want to commend our board that is actually attempting to build above the often 12 percent onsite. i'm a big, big fan of our 80/20 project. i'm glad we have developers that are appropriationing more and more of these. as we try to hit more than 33 percent of ford appable housing here in the city of san francisco. i support that in general but happy to see the city move forward but also glad we have

some clarification. this isn't approving a specific project and there will be time to get input and there's enough number of units. >> thank you supervisor kent. supervisor cohen. >> thank you madam president. through the chair to supervisor kim, i think you raised some critical points. i want to call your attention that i've been working with the mayor's office of housing to determine a clarity so when the housing application is complete or even when they're ready, we're not caught off guard. what happens is when the developer is ready to purchase the off site and there's little conversation so as you heard from ms. hey ward, they have 60 days to apply for the 80/20 which is the money that allows

developers to develop affordable housing. very, very smart in term of that formula, 80/20. we need to do a better job in terms of we are stream lining that process. should you decide you go with it, should you let us know sooner rather than later so we're not left scrambling and members like you and i are not on the hook left to explain to our constituents why are you letting this happen and we haven't gone through the full process in shaping what this project looks like. thank you. >> thank you. supervisor christensen. >> just wanted to add a brief comment. i certainly synthesize with the issue of supervisor cohen's constituents. i may know this site better than anybody on the board as i worked a block away for 20 years. ka trel has been a working class neighborhood and we're losing that feel