12 foot parapet down to one feet 3 and a half bus 6 is 9 and a half what is being showed a 6 to 8 feet above what the parapet was must have been referenced to the previous parapet and at this point, we're at within two or three feet above 9 and a half you add 3 feet 3 and a half feet i believe that's where the discrepancy is i don't want to question the board athletic determination i want to make sure we've been consistent on the plans and this is has been the center of the discussion the whole time and commissioner president fong and steve went back and measured the width of that penthouse 8 feet in change so i guess what i want to say that you know this is because of

situation with the penthouse in view of a number of homes in and about it is visible more than the inadequately modifications to a project but i again, i defer to the board on its determination about that athletic qualities but want to emphasis the hostage and truthfulness that jeff and i have put forward that was discovered on the sight permit we realized there was some movements 6 to 8 feet and that was a modification made in the addenda not typical in that public fashion i wanted to finish as well i don't feel terribly comfortable talking about the limits of the board's jurisdiction and i'm not going to arrest i'll defer to the city attorney on this this

is a project that has been accomplished and invested under state law a valid building permit and significant signatures into the building including the payment for the slate and construction and expenditures have been made this i don't want to august that i'll leave that for the attorney and questions. >> the 8 feet you referenced was your architect measured it from the plan is the 8 feet width. >> this is the addenda plans. >> yes. i don't have is scale we the another set of drawings to reduce it the same wicket as 8 feet 8 it was in the original and the addenda was 8 feet wide that didn't change that.

>> do you have a vested rights you shouldn't have built something in the first place. >> no. >> i'm funning since i was mayor why is this elevator to the roof first place and why wasn't i think so it has to go for commercial use but why does this elevator have to go to the roof in the first place and a structure on top of the roof if the elevator going interest you'll have the mechanic system but why a full sized elevator go there what's the necessity. >> to speak to the point about the commercial elevators going to the roof the whole purpose of the modification prior to the planning commission ways to reduce the budget on the roof as

much as possible so you know putting a second elevator in this this mark farrell for that was not really - >> your miss hearing me why does an elevator have to appear on - to go on top of that roof what's the purpose of this elevator openly on top of that roof understanding the structure was they're going below you have the mechanics but what is the purpose of having an elevator open on to this roof at this point, a fundamental question. >> the shorts answer to provide the exact date access to the roof in which jeff's father is in clear. >> i'm having a hard time here.

>> so one person in a wheelchair needs to get into a roof where the wind gusts to high elements i live 3 miles away i know the i know the weather and i used to work at 450 beach front street very familiar why does anybody needs to get on top of that roof by means of an elevator that's a fundamental question with all due respect to jeff's father. >> the answer explicit change they sdandz this for the business and family there's no other explanation. >> and it would be possible in the spirit of neighborhood concern in the spirit changing the character of the architecture on an

internationally known location it be wyoming be a postal to connotation compromise and not have if elevator to open for a minimal purpose is that true. >> the design and construction of a different elevator could provide absolutely without going to the roof yeah. >> okay mr. sanchez. >> thank you scott sanchez planning department so we reviewed it was stated clearly this is a residential roof deck the site was issued the site roof deck and the addenda says it is a residential roof deck with the dwelling unit no authorizations to have any other type of use the permits don't allow if so just wanted to state

that this was a suspension that a permit that was approved the addenda shows what they're building they're building matches and issued an addenda it was approved by all agencies as part of and i deny process there are changes not requiring a new notice no board put a refresh my recollection restrictions so that's where we are today a question whether i reviewed them in my discretion this before you to consider but know i appreciate the concerns regarding the potential commercial use the project sponsor and their person said no

attention it requires a change the permit didn't allow it if there's a proposal we'll need to prove review that it may require a discretionary review authorization but there's no proposal not on the plans it is a clear residential retirement board that provides open space and yeah open space for this units i'm available to answer any questions. >> i have a question not this is going to get us anywhere if you hadn't mistakenly issued the suspension we couldn't be here; is that correct. >> joe duffy reminded me (laughter) well that's two of us. >> i have a question mr. sanchez. >> so since this is eventually a iconic part of san francisco

lots photos this will change the sceney you have the flat spots this 8 foot 8 by 8 foot foot 8 can they can advertising or logos or lights. >> any of the signed permits again in the district it needs to be a business sign potentially but we would again that could be required a permit so there's a lot of speculation against what may potentially happen but we'll need to review the signage and proposals that is potentially lauding allowed to rereview. >> you look at the congress.

>> no different on a stairway penthouses from the building wall as opposed to on the building wall that is not a new structure that was a structure on the approved plan it is clear on all the plans that i've seen an elevator penthouse 9 foot 6 on the plans it is taller on the addenda went up to 14.6 i heard down to 11 or telephone foot so a couple of feet turn around reviewed by the board at the previous hearing maybe a concern or issue about whether it is or 8 feet it is clear if the materials the basis of appeal and the reference was concerned about the elevator penthouse how can someone say never a penthouse here. >> even though the plans and

the permits clearly statistics 9.6 according to everybody when people say 6 and 8 foot that permit holders eventually know that was 9.6 with the contention because i was there will was quite a few of the folks in the audience that night if there's a misconception it should be cleared up now we've got a bigger issue. >> i agree that is a lesson i don't believe that the full approved plans were provided to the board for this hearing the project manager made and i abbreviated submittal but insuring the board has a complete plan with making a decision that would be helpful if we can get to the bottom of things at the hearing and i think the sensitive expressed here a reasonable and

responsible we're here to i think protect the public trust we're here to protect the city of san francisco this is one ever our iconic neighborhoods not to be messed with lightly sears made this i can only compliment them to what they've contributed to a business stand point but they'll sell the building because they won't be here on the earth but that is a business they may decide to sell the building sears will be here for the longest and a sensitivity to the few feet is important and to raise as my fellow commissioner said what about the advertising and emphasizing it at in light and

the conversion is a public elevator but the conversion to a commercial use on top of that roof we'll be here for a a long time this is why i'm no action to grinds i wasn't around at the first hearing but i have an ax to grinds what could happen especially we're here for a long pet it wasn't interest now it is prominent if this was six or eight feet now we're over 12 feet or approximately 12 feet that gets big and prominent and that's an important change to the to the look of our waterfront that's where my sensitivity is that's why we have to take this so, so

seriously that's where i'm at. >> i appreciate i'll add the permit didn't include the roof deck. >> let's go back to the process a little bit i'm going in agreement with you yes there was an elevator whatever the metrics that were applied to that at the hearing it wasn't actually kwhafls built in terms of the process from your staff when after the site plan was approved the addenda goes back to you folks for review admittedly the ada elevator or stair penthouse can steady the height limits that's part of the code but does our

staff look at something that changes from a volume metric projection on the sited document to what becomes part of something much larger? >> yes. i mean, i discussed this with staff i believe that the explanation was they felt it to be in conformity with the approval and noting there's no separate notification required the expansion of the envelope didn't appear and the staff noted the commission did not restrict the height of the elevator penthouse and that the subsequent change was appropriate it is code compliant. >> i have one more does the historic review look at this. >> the historic preservation commission approved. >> sorry

they approved it this one in particular i--i don't know the level off the top of my head they the review it. >> are they required to review this. >> i'll need to take into account the notes what level if any preservation review is required. >> we look at the buying the windows is not to the effect of how it effects our city look but we have a skyline roof of one of the most famous cities in the worlds should be some overall view. >> i appreciate that is the rooftop compliance it is complying something not unclassification of the neighborhood they have penthouse but they want a larger one not the only penthouse in the

neighborhood. >> thank you. >> commissioners the matter is submit. >> does anyone have anything to say. >> i've heard that before. >> i have a question. >> i'm curious mr. duh if you looked at this photo i'm countering plywood sheets does that look like 8 feet to you. >> the photo. >> uh-huh. >> sorry what was the photo. >> not sure which photo. >> in the brief. >> that photo there. >> no, it didn't look like it is solid. >> in terms of the width. >> offering sorry 4 feet width looks like 3. >> a little bit less than 3. >> maybe a little bit more than

8 feet but not much. >> they said 8, 8 you the flat is 4 by 8. >> it is hard to photograph i'm renewal to see how we hold the camera and things like that. >> is it on us. >> yeah. >> i mean, i think that and unfortunately circumstances that the elevators needs to be switched because of lack of overview when it is there i would only be willing to agree if there are additional conditions or special refresh my recollection no commercial use on the roof deck, no use of advertising and that it is 12

foot one at a maximum height agency the architect caught. >> counting from where they talk about the roof and the parapet. >> actually, let's go through i have a different thinking outside the box opinion. >> commissioners that is the zoning administrators discussion. >> whether to keep the zoning commission or not. >> to me the process of a site permit is one you're showing the extent of with what your proposing therefore an obligation to hold to that i don't think they held to that i don't accept the arguments just because a mustache or manufacturing can't give them what they want is a relevant excuse we brought that up at the

previous hearing they said well this is a what we went with that's a volume metric agreement made the project sponsor and planning should have made that kind of review whether switched from 9 up to 14 to me that's not part of the agreement so therefore i can't support the release of the suspension. >> so if the suspension is kept in place what are the consequences ever that maybe mr. sanchez can answer that since he got up. >> thank you scott sanchez planning department so the board does want the suspension to remain in place there is a ultimately released if suspension it could be they're required to get a revision

permit so document the height my understanding they're proposing changes to reduce from the 146, 6 authorized if the addenda a separate proposal and you know we could reapprove that and it could get appealed to this board but i mean it's a little bit of a pickle. >> pickle. >> yeah. >> one possibility if the boards identifies the reason with for the zoning administrator, what say you? error and that could be corrected then that would address the problem so if he record because of finding the height was appropriate and disagree with that then they can correct that. >> - >> we need. >> as absolutely that's an

example. >> i think that was the direct a that's what he heard in the direction commissioner fung that the an error was made. >> what was agreed to, what was accepted was something significantly different than what has emerged navigate he gave a lot of reasons it shouldn't have but, in fact, what was accepted what was approved and what was what we're talking about now at 14 or 12 feet it is different so you know that's where the error is. >> so on that go ahead commissioner. >> i'm struggling because he

says that he might have made an error in send it in the first instance. >> he misunderstood. >> so i'm struggling where that falls here. >> under our analysis. >> so it is what it is now we are sort of handed this opportunity in a way; right? but we don't want to go back and revisit the structure in the first instance; right? >> talking about is did they violate the deal whether six or eight or 10 whatever; right? that's where we are at. >> we're where needing to decide whether the zoning

administrator record. >> right. >> could i because i'm formulating a thought if we do reverse this da and maintain the suspension maybe that provides them the opportunity for continued discussion and some attempt for compromise. >> right. >> which i think of necessity will happen in the suspension is - if our comfortable with saying the record. >> another a anytime that creates for the discussion at a minimum. >> even the 11.2 height. >> part of me is saying i'm not sure what the numbers are you

want to see everybody work this out if it is only a couple of feet turn around like that not that serious i'm not sure that's a safe promise. >> we can continue; right? or we can uphold the suspension and let the departments and the permit holders and public i think i'm sorry. >> why not finish our our thought. >> i want to ask do we have a concern of vested right issue or - >> it is something we could look into in not based on what is in the record. >> i want to make a suggestion

yeah. >> i'm not sure if this board is comfortable so as of right now you are permits with 14 and a half penthouse go in front of ever you, you we have drawings but nothing else on file we can if you want to continue this for a short time we can put a building permit on file that reduces that 14 and a half feet down to the 11, 2 and the 12, 8 for that small box that is the two or three feet turn around approved last time that you know puts the permit will require that's what we have to- unfortunately, we might end up in an appeal of that permit i'm not sure there are ways to process that more quickly but that is just a thought that it

would think that is guaranteeing the fix we're suggesting. >> counselor. >> you just states the whole root of this problem you just said 12 point whatever is two or three higher than what was approved by this board before and that's the root of the problem this board by my observation by our statement just now approvals something 6 tool 8 feet and now come back with something at 12 foot one or it doesn't matter it is two to three feet higher than than approved the issue how to get back to what was approved by 2, 3, 4 this board first place the two to three feet lower i'm

quoting i directly. >> i don't want to august with you i'm saying the permit has gone through the process and approved as appropriate as unfortunate i'm not arguing you, you but trying to suggest an idea how to move forward here but obviously i can defer to this. >> and 8 foot 8 as the dimensions for the guernsrnegur >> the reason with the newer trends in the elevators i was surprised you know even if they screwdriver original they're talking about voice type elevators that penthouse would have been 21 feet to get the

equipment up there and it changed to you can where those days you'll get they looked the motor is at the bottom and stuff like this but you still require a significant penthouse up above so when we went through this discussion before you know and they proposed that dimension i don't think it could be done they proposed that that was an acceptance of what the volume was being requested and therefore i think what we should do is go with our thoughts on the das release of suspense and they'll need to do what they need to do because if they make any changes a lot of revisions to the permit and that's

appealable. >> so i would move to grants the appeal and over turn the release of suspension on the basis that the da record becau- erred. >> it comes from the release of suspense itself it says if the release is done in part because the project is constructed in substantial to the approved plan you could say the error the board can find not in substantial conformity. >> that make sense. >> that's my motion. >> okay. >> the motion by the president to grant appeal and overturn the

release of suspension that the zoning administrator erred because the building is not been constructed with the approved plan on that motion you commissioner fung. >> commissioner vice president honda. >> commissioner wilson and commissioner swig okay that motion carries and the release of suspension is over turned and blocked commissioner president lazarus no madam clerk, any other business before this committee? >> we're -

>> the commission will please come to order at secretary will call roll commissioner taylor-mcghee commissioner chow commissioner chung commissioner sanchez and commissioner walker

second item it did approval of the minutes for july 21st, 2015. >> so the minors are before us for approval a motion for approval is in order. >> so moved is there a second. >> second. >> are there corrections to the minutes if not we're prepared for the >> all in favor, say i. >> i. >> opposed? minutes have been passed unanimously item 3 the director's report. >> good afternoon, commissioners mayor ed lee signed the city's balanced budget for fiscal year 2015-2016 and 2016-2017. in his comments he said that your creating jobs and growing a thriving economy while keeping the city save and compassionate the city and county of san francisco the major employer for the next two fiscal years includes additional employees to

staff the new san francisco general hospital implements our electronic health care records system and the department of public health division as well as implementing the affordable health care act the city budget also vests to support the most vulnerable san franciscans and it includes resources dedicated to help san francisco general hospital adding 5 hundred new supportive housing for people to the navigation center and millions of new fund to support seniors and people with disabilities covered california has a modest rate interest for san francisco for 2016 they recalling reduce the prices in san francisco, california expect an average rate of 4 percentage across all terse this is more than all the regions in northern california

we had a great anniversary of the 50th anniversary of medicare and medi-cal celebration of medicaid on july 30th, 1965, presidents johnson signed the medi-cal and medicare for pregnant women and people with disabilities medal and medicare has protected health and improving the nations economic security on july thursday medi-cal and medicare serves held on event added san francisco general hospital and trauma center to commemorate the 50th anniversary of the medi-cal and medicare our dr. hernandez and ceo of the health care foundation was the distinguished keynote speaker we have started a black

african-american health project there are 3 processes for the projects one of those is the workforce development and that workforce subcommittee has begun in the project chart for the black african-american health initiative was you signed in march and whether the fifth committees that is headed by our colleagues are leading this effort and promoting the interests for the african-american careers and creating black african-american applicants students and volunteers they hope to develop tragedies so retain and show ridicule and support the continued education for the pathway for the existing staff i want to thank them for that work in that area there is an update for san francisco general hospital no new compute u

updated other than they're waiting for approval for staff and i'll let the commissioners know we're still moving forward towards building our new hospital director's report is ended and if there are any questions and commissioners questions of the director on the report i want to point out to the commissioners we had printout from the website the organizers of the 50th anniversary program that was submitted to us a liz of the contents of medi-cal and medicare over the past 50 years i thought would be useful for your information we're having that distributed to you today are there any outlet comments? if not we'll precede thank you and we'll precede oh, actually yeah. just want to comment once again

that the mayors budget for our next two years is really extraordinary for in department and want to thank the department for all the work they've run intoburgburg to advocate for the program and the mayor and board of supervisors for having actually confirmed not just confirmed but added to it and gave us even more robots i think that says well, for the work that our department is doing so thank you, again director >> i'll note no public comment for that item but item 4 is general public comment we have one. >> yes. mr. office of the city administrator to duffey i didn't please and mr. duffey i have a timer for 3 minutes when the

buzzer goes off. >> commissioners nice to meet you i'm on the health center clinic patient advisory committee i have a sister at the age of the internet a 6 degrees of separation but not 3 degrees of separation we know be a lot more people before that i think that is kind of a silver lining to the aging process for example, i heard about rudolph better gary's doing the artwork and i'm looking forward to take a look at that ford was president and hopper and many people responded and i'm looked forward to it look those links i've been in

the citizens advisory committee for some time and tom o'dell won 20 years now we've had some ups and downs and some times we came close to disbanding with the budget part of new to the center was difficult our liaison died we worked through all those things is it appears that the department is putting ay used effort dr. the director she's a apparently going to be at all the health centers i want to thank you for doing that i think there are look good things it come out of that i've been involved and it helps to have reenforcements thank you. >> thank you all right. we'll move on to item 5 report back if

the finance committee. >> chair. >> good afternoon the finance and planning committee met before the commission meeting and we had you know a really robust discussion on the presentation on chirtd care and i think that actually inspired more questions than answer and including you know the goals of charity care like you know in the time of the valuable affordable health care act and charity care was adopted 15 years ago and back then we didn't have the kind of sentiment as we do today those were some of the questions that

came up and you know the presentations were actually coming to the commission and so i want to put on this to thinking how we can actually create a partnership that really serves the buyer city and county of san francisco and including the most important part to reduce you know like health care for those who live in the city we also have some new and old contracts for your approval and it is all on the consent calendar with the contract report there are actually, two items that have been tabled for the next meeting for approval and those two are the medical contracts and services and the network within the contract report the 3

contracts that would be still need your approval will be the clinic works the data way and the staffing. >> commissioners the reason i've taken off a clerical error the report needs to be clean before it comes to you. >> right there were typos. >> any questions. >> commissioner questions or comments to the report from commissioner chow? no comments all right. great we'll go to the next item >> we'll move on to item six the consent calendar consent calendar is before you you heard the two items that are removed from the consent calendar does anyone wish to extract any items if the calendar otherwise. >> yes. please

within the contract report so under the consent calendar it will be all the items on the consent calendar that we need approval of within the contract report which we have to items removed. >> yeah. it is the 9 approximately 8 millions on the pharmacy agreement; right? >> tip probation officers and 1, 3 and 1, 5 for the pharmacy kind of in the middle of the block of the first folder all contained in the contract report. >> any other questions? if not we should note that the walgreens program extends our 40 b program that required a link to each clinic only to all of the san francisco walgreens

clinics under the b program is that not correct director barbara garcia >> that's correct. >> that's a significant difference an, an added benefit to the program under 9 previously i nodded if you were at chinatown clinic and went down to only one walgreens and couldn't go to another walgreens you had to go to another one like castro that allows all the walgreens in san francisco to participate in this program. >> that was my only clarification we're prepared forever the vote. >> all in favor, say i. >> i. >> opposed? the calendar has been adopted unanimously. >> thank you, commissioners item 7 the dpw policy on the dpw facilities as you recall this was introduced at the last

meeting. >> good afternoon, everyone. commissioners colleen i did not have anything additional as the secretary said the draft of the policy at the last meeting it didn't require our package of the resolution only the affirmation. >> i was wondering if on this is more a technical question on the block that we have which on page 2 if you would get that if so r this this is yet california but for the process in the text and my two questions and which i believe are editorial under the section for dpw non-hospital

building and director would review and submit recommendations and would it seems to me that the commission actually then makes also a review and recommendation; right? to the board of supervisors as it says under item d. >> yeah. >> so the block should clarify that by putting that in and the board recommends. >> so i'll make that change. >> thank you and so the last - the bottom block expelling facility naming in connection with the gift of any amount u amount the director reviews and submits the remedies for final approval and here i believe under our section e it says that the commission will approve the request so the word approve needs to be there also and moves it to the board of supervisors.

>> to be consistent with our text. >> that's right thank you for catching that commissioner. >> so if those are accepted as the editorial correction ann another motion it in order to approve the column. >> so moved. >> there is a motion and a second is there further discussion on the policy? if not, we're prepared vote >> all in favor, say i. >> i. >> opposed? the policy is passed unanimously thank you thank you, commissioner i also note no public comment or questions item 8 is the resolution of the port naming the general clinic and richard a fine clinic. >> i'm not sure who is representing item - ms. >> if you recall a presentation at the last meeting. >> yes would you like to help

refresh our minds on the items. >> there was a proposal on the small video last week of the part of the richard fine to rename the general clinic at san francisco general hospital the richard h fine clinic and the drafts resolution in front of you for your consideration compliant with the - and the draft resolution is before you the motion will be in order. >> so moved. >> is there a second. >> there's a second commissioner sanchez. >> yes. >> yeah. i just like to make a comment pertaining to the naming of that clinic regarding dr. fine initially when it was brought before the jc c to be named by the

department and in reference to the hourlong program in general many of us attended it was an awesome tribute to a outstanding recommendation to the richmond h fine clinic i sort of took the wind out of my sails it was shifted to dr. richard fines people's clinic and i've been trying to get that out of high head why hadn't it bothered me i've known dr. fine when i joined and at 69 all the way through and couldn't think of a more outstanding position to have a clinic named at the san francisco general hospital to have it named that i guess somehow this sort of

limitations his focus and maybe i'm just responding many of us were involved in the 60s and 70s in coming back with the gi bill to berkley and at central nervous system that was part of our effort but dick fine was an extraordinary human being, he played a key roll in working with many of us at the general to form call the urban healthy was a key member it involved every single chief of service at the general from dr. tom surgery to dr. from that he had arctic's and we got them altogether and got the funding, etc. to not only increase the qualities of service based on the philosophy

of our faculty and residents the outcomes in reference to what they're doing and dr. fine played a critical role and continues to play a critical role so the funds many of the folks that served only the committees were some of the old guard the services of retired champions and many at the oil library at the san francisco general you saw all departments one or two some were submitted with replacements and this is a meaningful thought so i got a few comments from dick fine represents the finest of central nervous system so i want to interject that that needs to be said and something else that is important dick fine figure out through the urban health board to insure the minority students

in potrero hill be bayview hunters point and the mission had opportunities through san francisco general hospital did this through the urban health and navigate 4 videotapes we're working with the students and working with other groups to increase access to training and minority positions one the key people involved was francis a mexican-american who become a nurse and got her masters was the director of the urban health project and she was showing so impressed with his service unfortunately after they passed away left a scholarship for the students from the valley to go into nursing and paycheck to the services he provided to the community to me had doesn't say enough about him the reason i'm

saying that in other types of awards like the staff like the julie the honorees for top residency in each of the departments we think about what dr. discretionary review violence did but julie discretionary review violence he supported many the dean and the chancellor but his commitment was the quality of care at general hospital we had the rapid report and talked about who they were and why they're here so as i envision dick fine clinic i imagine their teaching the under graduates and staff what an outstanding position dick machine fine was in the memory of san francisco general hospital that was dedicated to serving i'll regardless of country or people

anyway, i just want to share that i think that - he doesn't like to be so-called - i mean, he marks to a difficult drum but worked within those organizations and programs to insure that access to qualify remains the flagship of excellence and the medication that no other departments in the central nervous system we feel some of us feel quite strongly it would have been great to keep it that way and the curriculum and the training of the future health providers would certainly reflect his philosophy and commitment to people of all walks of life that was what he was through the chair i apologize for getting into that but i'll support it so recommended but i do feel you know it could have been greater

had we kept the tradition and used that as an ongoing teaching this is in my opinion. >> thank you, commissioner because commissioner you can amend the resolution but i think i'd ask director garcia. >> yes. i asked the same question and know it is not just people so i asked the same question that request that went through dr. fine and that way i honestly think it takes away from what you said dr.ations and fine i believe that went through him and he supported that and in fact, he does walk to a different drum i wanted to honor the way he was and i the that

through the staffer that presented it i appreciate our comments and puts the meaning that is the bigger title. >> thank you. >> thank you. >> okay. i think we could note the reason it the name is in and unless commissioner you're entitled to amend the resolution okay. any further comments if not all those in favor of the resolution as presented please say i opposed any public comment no vision zero update. >> item 9. >> good afternoon, commissioners and director barbara garcia and

secretary thanks for the opportunity i'm megan wear the director of the health and sustainability and also co-sponsor of the vision zero task force to present to my colleagues we put together vision zero initiative in may of 2014 the committee passes the resolution in support of vision zero we're here to provide an update. >> so just a give you a little bit of background about preceding vision zero san francisco has been annotate leader respect to transportation safety with the first to install the pedestrians countdowns we're all familiar with now we've been a leader with implementing this to schools in 2010 had a mayoral directive for the collision down

by 2021 we played a leadership role including for the prelims of a number of improvements and publishing a pedestrian strategy in 2014 vision zero was adopted citywide including by the commission and citywide task force was established i co-sponsor you know despite the exchanges around this at the end of 2013 a girl 6 years old was killed in a intersection awhile crossing the 6th death in that december and the city's responses is no more deaths are acceptable and really the only acceptable target is zero we now have san francisco in vision zero that is supportive by a number of city departments the mayor, the board of supervisors we meet on a quarterly basis of the task

force towards the ends of coordinating around engineering and execution and enforcement and activities to fundamentally will eliminate traffic deaths by 2024 it was introduced in 1997 had much success we needed to design a transportation system that protects the most vulnerable people using the transportation system including people walking and biking and seniors and young people i think in many ways that block is consistent with the mission of the department of public health i know this is you guys can you see the map hopefully in our handout i don't know about that slide since vision zero was adapted it is inspiring to see the national limit it growing hopefully, a map that shows the

different cities across the country that adopted vision zero and in 2014 san francisco and the city we've got a number of cities in california adopted last year well including santa fe, san diego and a number of cities in the country including portland and seattle and additional cities are really every week their say new energy around our city and country a vision to do you want that to san francisco is at the forefront of this. >> yeah. >> oh, no. >> i apologize. >> thank you there's the map and really with respect to in san francisco what we've seen despite early declines in the 90s and the 80s starting in the

2000s we've seen the please be advised the ringing of and use of cell phones, to in the death in our city thirty fatalities a year up to 2 hundred a year injuries and approximately 70 percent are people walking and biking and half the people killed are walking awhile walking are seniors while i'm here to talk about the leadership that the department is providing in that work including on the task force with respect to the data and analysis and evaluation and education engagement in our growing roles as well the task force is co-chaired by mta and dpw we meet as i said on a quarterly basis comprised of city agencies that play a key role no vision zero we've got active community engagement including the neighborhood coalition led and i by walk sf

over 40 organized that signed on that coalition it is really existing to see the continued engagement of the community in this work. >> in 2014 and 2015 we had a number of successes with respect to progress on vision zero it's first year we had 24 projects in 24 months 16 projects are underground they're on track to completing that project delivery showing the city's commitment with respect to education citywide campaigns honest leadership on this she'll talk about and seen an increase or increase on the part of the police department and working on developing more data tools to make sure that the initiatives

are day driven and also has hired a new epidemiologist who is serve for this work as well as advancing with community organizations we have a two year action strategy on our we are talking about that is online that includes more information about the initiatives as well as resolution of the number of departments that joined the hunting in supporting vision zero with respect to the action in 2015-2016 i highlighted in blue when i'm talking about we're going to dive deeper on today including the citywide strategy for education to schools and we're excited in the most recent budget in the seniors program is implemented given the disproportionate fatalities among the seniors and monitoring

the resources and continuing the community engagement slides on reverse is a high-level summary of the resources into vision zero which is appropriate three-quarters by grants and 25 percent from the general fund with respect to the data piece one key contribution that was identifying the high injury network that map identifies the 12 percent of street miles of fatality injuries to vision zero includes people in vehicles and riding bikes and vehicles this is in the contained how to effectively have the preservation initiative at its core of vision zero is the fundamentally addressing the issues of evaluated so in red the high injury corridors in communities of concern that are

disproportionately low income communities and communities of color and community where people are walking and relying on transit and thor percent of the streets in the city 50 percent of part of high injury network dpw is also working with other city departments to develop accountability metrics we know that the goal of zero fatalities is you know the how to be accountability in the short time to have any driven actions and monitoring the impacts on the street a number of metrics we are working to measure in the interim our new epidemiologist we're excited about our collaboration with the san francisco general hospital to work with the trauma sushlgz that treat the patients and working with the polite data

to capture 25 percent of cyclists injuries on the records and we're able to target our initiatives and she's really done precedent work meeting with the police department and the transportation agency all on the same page about the monitoring that is very intuitive and simple i sure it you it not as simple as it seems weren't to having it consistently recorded to the public and there's a screen side of map that is u updated with respect to fatalities we've also development an online interactive injury data with environmental data on a number of factors that are associated

with how we predict and look at it patterns this is a screen shot of map that helps us look at not only the types of injuries but what are the patterns where the aerial streets and fast moving traffic around schools and senior centers and this type of tool has been used for example, with the sfmta capital improvement program for pedestrian safety to analyze the patterns and really target their engineering to the patterns we see in the corridors so have more program improvement measures and now i'm going to turn it over to ann no way that will talk about education. >> good afternoon, everyone. everybody with respect to education related to vision zero we really are working very close

with our partners headed by the mta to create the prosperity citywide strategy to the board of supervisors and the transportation authority outlining all the different educational opportunities welds implement in the next few years for vision zero and we've adopted 37b9 with the information proud about it's the public preservation is not just teaching individuals about how to slow down or cross the streets but we're effecting all the levels we're talking to the providers in various was our health providers the muni operators large vehicle operators we're working with the coalitions i'll talk about in a minute and changing our organizational practices and working with flunking 0 policy and we're going to achieve vision zero we have a citywide

strategy that outlines a number of different educational opportunities i managed save out to school and as megan tubed we've included the streets for pedestrians and the mayor's office has funded it in the city budget for that the next two years because over 50 percent of pedestrian fatalities are seniors and this is a population that needs a lot of save so save outreach we're looking at ways inform coordinate all the information about vision zero and bring that directly to seniors and people with disabilities we focused on creating community-based education this picture is a standard campaign i've worked with supervisor kim's office all over at tenderloin and selma and a had tare highlighting the community residents a professional photo

shot that is in the neighborhood we live here please slow down we offer some grants to selective groups that are working in neighborhoods that are on the high injury network walk sf is the leads for the coalition and groups that serve modeling and non-english communities south of market and chinatown ceda and the economic agency with working with groups in their native languages to deliver the information a national program we founded in 2009 we're interested in promoting walking and biking for obviously for various reasons of promoting health to make it safety in order to do so we work with the school district and a number of city agencies and a

number of community-based groups school starts in 2 weeks we're adding 10 for elementary schools to the program that covers half of the elementary schools i'm proud to say they've passed the vision zero last spring they're one of the lastly partners to join us and as part of changing organizational practices our team worked with the mta to produce intents the schools on the next those are schools that have typically high rates of walking and have a lot of injuries in the buffers of school their prioritized to get the improvements to the streets and sidewalks my prime is gene elementary have r half of the population walking to school and the highest number of pedestrian injuries we have asked mta to

produce intents and have gotten 3 grants for the elementary we work with the vision zero coalition it is lead by walk sf and in partnership with the bicycle coalition they help folks to keep the city accountability we again offer many grants and the prime example is actually before vision zero we gave walk sf a little less than $10,000 in 2011 to implement a local option in the subtly was passed to allow the municipalities to implements 15 mile-per-hour school zones we're the only city to fully take advantage of the local option to the city hall's that are eligible other schools in san francisco have done it on a

skais basis but walk sf worked with mta to get if implemented for all the schools it makes all the schools once the speed limit drops it helps with the bumps and the speed limits needs to be reduced first, it was done by walk sf i want to acknowledge one thing barbara co-wrote with her counterpart ed reiskin and acknowledge the hard work with rachel and the communication team for working closed with the mta communication team in helping to profile vision zero in the communication it's been getting a lot of attention and that's the end of the presentation we're open for questions. >> thank you very much questions commissioners

commissioner taylor-mcghee. >> a clarification goith the 15 mile-per-hour they're eligible for the school zone unless they're actually on high-speed aerial so 4 or more lanes not allowed to have that in the state law only 4 schools in san francisco for example, betsey carmichael has it does not have it on one end which is on 7th street but on the surrounding 3 areas the block that are narrower and smaller so but those streets will be getting bigger improvements through other avenues of vision zero and they're a dozen schools that have absolutely no boundaries

the mission school is o1 on 16t street from mission all the way up to church. >> commissioner sanchez. >> this is a think excellent report i'm really glad to see the coordination among the nonprofits this is a good benchmark a number of schools that may not be eligible with the early childhood schools that are part of the school district they're not huge but they're very important and they have families that walked or drive cars and drop off, etc. i know them particularly in the mission that contacted us over the years about trying to get signage that shows kids crossing or especially you have like alleys going between and you get cars

or motorcycles and bikes and parents are trying to pick up their can i see and the teachers it is really traumatic my question is there some unit that could be contacted or we could refer them to get signs posted both in the eel and in the white zones which they have they have for a year and a half to get the signs saying do not park here it's a real question. >> i'll certainly take that back to mta the issue is unfortunately in all of the codes that mta has to operate by the schools are denied by k through 12 we'll brick bring it back. >> it is we're trying to fourth why. >> it comes up repeatedly. >> i'd like to acknowledge tour staff i sat in one of the

meetings with the police and municipal transportation agency with a variety of different agencies they've done an incredible jobs where they have the dollars for the endemocrat lots of so the influence of the health department on the transportation system not only for vision zero but other issues have come up in terms of the growing city of san francisco so i want to acknowledge many years of their companionship around this area they've done a fantastic job thank you. >> very good eric commissioner king. >> congratulations to our ability to get grants that takes a lot of pressure off the city so congratulations i had a request this request in the future when you give us the data

on fatalities by injuries that is what you're aiming for as well and it would be great to track the progress on that. >> it is something having lane in a our epidemiologist that is based out of central nervous system and we are working closely to get not only the severe injuries by the police department. >> defined by the hospital they've got different clarifications at the it is important to understand for the reasons to sharing the preliminary analysis and we looked forward to implementing them. >> that's great whether you look at other cities that are farther along than us on in journey what turn out to be the common iltsz that the work is hard to bring the numbers down to zero.

>> i mean, i think you know in other - you know the example of other international examples is a movement at the core of sweden the engineering so the reality we have a high-level of commitment but you know taking the time to get into the ground is building up the infrastructure so doing with we they've done a great job they have the effective approach of getting things in the ground so you see in the tenderloin removing the parking at the intersections so things go underground and improving the crosswalks or the infrastructure we can do that in the short time and the long term getting things in the ground the 24 projects has been something we're excited

about happening but doing that you know there's a vision zero network that is being kicked off nationally in of the former director of the bicycle coalition is the director of that network she just got back from a fellowship in europe how do we bring that to the united states combining those improvements with data and fundamental focusing on speed we have a goal of fatalities and speed is the strongest predict so, so currently we're not it is not legal to implement something in the state of california but in washington, d.c. they've seen a 50 percent reduction in fatalities so long term with vision zero helping change the

culture around how to produce intents human life rather than how fast we get if from a to b we're loading to address. >> thanks. >> yes commissioner. >> thank you for coming back after you presented to us last year as the day that i present to us as the number of walking kids walking or people walking and biking goes up it is how the data shows that the numbers are not going on is there a way to look at the encouragement of biking and walking. >> in san francisco we had really strong goals with respect to increasing walking and biking that is being tracked by the sfmta so i think you know vision zero

is part of that larger mod role how to see the increases but not seeing the increases in most of the injuries i look at the map of san francisco there are concentrated in the in and of itself quadrant of the city we have the most walking that didn't have to be occupied but walking that is a design problem in the large part we can fix we want more people walking don't have to see the rise a that's what they've been able to accomplish. >> that would be great if that data can be a comparison represented. >> all right. so on the accountability and benchmarks then would we be expecting that in the coming report a year from now obviously you're putting a number of things in place. >> yeah. we are.

>> we have this raw data it is good it is starting to gown again, i think you have some others to try to do this i actually was - i thought the school zones were 15 miles. >> for years. >> (inaudible). >> please accompany to the microphone. >> sorry not before 2011. >> that wasn't part of motor vehicle code. >> prior to that that was 25 mile-per-hour. >> really so it dropped so therefore there is a - there will be signs - there are signs interest. >> there are signs all schools eligible that are signs posted 15 mile-per-hour. >> does that include all schools or only public. >> all parochial and charter and private we have

approximately 2 hundred schools in the city and about 2/3rd's is public but all the schools with eligible. >> then i know that there are yell crosswalks; right? are those also paint at all the schools. >> yes. those are specific the yellow to schools. >> all the 2 hundred schools. >> yep, all crossing guards eligible at all schools. >> it's hard to believe it's been a year since you were all here and you've done a lot is i just by the following year; right? the endemocrat lost and all we should be able to get summer day on what is happening as we move towards it i thought that was

great to get international data and see how the other cities are doing a he how we're staying ahead in no further comments we thank you for your report and look forward to you returning with another positive report. >> great, thank you commissioners no public comment item 10 the dpw proposal to modernize the proposal and the city option and create a new city wellness fund. >> this item was introduced at the last meeting so you'll have a vote. >> good afternoon, commissioners el lien again in response to the commissions discussion at the last meeting we went back with additional analysis in 3 key areas and submitted a follow-up memo to summarize the work we had done so you asks you to do an

economic stress test we performed and asked us for address information to changes to some of the language in the resolution and encouraged us to have an eye it on the developments program for future either further evaluation we discussed it also i'm having the same problem with my - but i'll continue i'm on slide 3 of the - i don't know if you have this slide but essentially for the economic stress test we looked at the trends that emerged during the last recession from 2009 to june sorry 2007 to june 2009 june 2009 was when the recovery

began we were not fully out of low period at this point we ask the uc berkley does the affordability analysis to look at the historical effect of the recession on san franciscans income they told us two major take a ways the first income shifts towards little lower end of the spectrum of the things in your packet between 2008 and 2010 there was a 9 point increase in the number of san franciscans who earned less than 2 hundred and 50 percent of the poverty level those at the lower-income increase and at the same time, a decrease in 5 percent and the incomes shifts peeks in 2010 as incomes grail increase as of the eco report from 2012

at point hadn't reached the recession levels i'm sorry technical difficulties you can't see the power point the other key findings a recession will present a increase in apartment employment for lower than the 2 hundred and 50 percent of the poverty level and another graph in the packet is apartment to that in 2010 and the shift towards lower incomes is partially explained by people working apartment during the recession in addition to sorry so we look at the effect of the recession in 2008, and 2009 on bridge to coverage and healthy san francisco on the bridge to

recovery program we used the income shifts to model the bridge to coverage in the economic downturn we took the 9 point difference increase in the incomes of people below 2 hundred and 50 percent of poverty and applied that to the projection of the programmers and the 1 point increase in those 0 above 4 percent of income to model our participation overall we anticipate the program is sustainable bus the lower-income flshd the federal participation and decreases the participation on local resources the number of people eligible either they moved the job and didn't quality them for the program in new engrossment increases because the employers will be transcribing on their on

behalf of that overall increase is greater than than the increase in expenditures related to the people if the program because those additional people are eligible for federal subsidies than the people pavrnt in the program we discussed that uc berkley the inflation scenario in the event that health insurance and bridge to coverage rises but in the coverage of the costs is increasing but the employers is tied to the health insurance that also rise at the cost of covered california we believe that is neutral on the program we also did a stress test on healthy santa fe san francisco what does it mean for healthy san francisco and in an economic downturn san francisco will

continue to fulfill the 17 thousand ingredient for coordinating the care and continuing to do what it does for us today as previously recorded to the commission a healthy role model the general fund forever the emergency use we the an analysis in our original memo of the 12 hundred individuals we allowed to city in healthy it san francisco as a result of unaffordability of health insurance and we element that will void 2 hundred e.r. i have visits at san francisco general hospital enough to provide preventive care for 2 hundred and 35 families new landscape the modernization proposal mitigates the economic downturn of healthy san

francisco in two important ways one it eligibility for medi-cal for the lowest income more people will be eligible for - more individuals will be eligible for bridge to coverage giving them coverage and not making them ineligible for healthy san francisco second item the health commission asked you us to look at the wellness funds and hesitant on approving the wellness program since the last commission meeting we'll have presented to the small business commission and the health population division we've received valuable feedback from each the presentations small business commission we gave a similar presentation that you got at our last commission

meeting no concerns or recommended changes for the bridge to coverage or healthy san francisco components of the proposal and for the employee wellness program the small business commission oebldz the health commission that the small business in particular are not likely to have the means or on the human resources sign to manage a wellness program they asked you us during the stakeholder process to look at developing a program that smaller employers what participate in collectively rather than having to manage on their own consultation with the population health division identified other opportunities to partner and say they've generally excited about new ways to partner for example, four onsite occupation health and safety training and many clinics for disease testing and

they also were excited about the ability to tie those to overall efforts to increase the health literacy and enrollment insurance and addressing building the employer was a critical xhoenlt of chief financial officer the health in san francisco in response to the health commission feedback and the information from the small business commission we've made modifications to the resolution which you have in your form that requests your approval to composer and among the option that have the hunting restraining order lubricating taking those services suggested that the health commission asks do us for . >> and finally on the evaluation of the new bridge to

coverage program we heard clearly preacher from dr. kateing he wants us to be sure that the impact of the proposal was thought-out and the program design we can do that so we've been in conversation with the san francisco health commission and the bridge to heartache coverage to make sure we can track health updates and citywide health indicators and the health benefits over time that's a summary of memo we presented to you in follow-up to your last meeting a revised resolution rather is available for you for your consideration and polk action today. >> thank you commissioners we did receive before your place a written statement from the san francisco labor council which i believe

you have endorses the proposed bridge program and had some issues considering the wellness we've heard from the people from mr. paulson and he has submitting that in writing commissioner pating who was unable to be here sent a note he'll encourage and personally feels that health care makes sense and hopes that his fellow commissioners b will vote to approve that resolution he also called for us to be mindful of the means for community assistance and contributions from employers employees and all to create a good universal health care program so you have that letter

before you are there any - anyone signed up for public comment. >> not received the public comment i apologize for the glitch not someone to help us out. >> commissioners discussion or a motion on the resolution? >> commissioner - commissioner singer. >> thanks colleen and thanks for being responsive to my comments we're getting used to our thoroughness we're super helpful your team and you spent a lot of time on i just wanted to say that i appreciate the change to the language on the wellness proposal and as we're getting into that understanding the complexity and trying to make trade offs i encourage the department as our studying it to not get completely sold that we

should do this as you study is it you shill have still have to keep in mind the possibility that might not be a good use of funds certainly not arguing those things you've sited in the workplace that are available to itch larger employers are not available and potentially good things to do for the set of san franciscans that work in small employers but i think that one of the goals for studying it ought to be if we're as a city going to devote resources practically speaking where are we going to get as much help if we spend those funds someplace else it is hard to measure we have to have that mindset to maybe we're not going to get the return on the investment the

universities or other populations that need it much more remember much of those people are access to some health insurance there are other places i add we keep that possibility in mind as we go through this. >> thank you commissioner sanchez. >> i would move the resolution i think that staff has done the group did an excellent job they've listened and had meeting with the small groups the recommendations is needed gives us the flexibility to explore all options some of the major functions are interested in funding the links to provide new services those wellness programs are good for preservation in any way to generate that, etc. so you know there's a lot of exploration we could be doing i

hope we'll sure we use those foundation grants to provide a unique model we've been able to do over the years again congratulations and move the resolution this afternoon thank you, thank you there's a motion and second. >> any further discussion on the resolution? commissioner karshmer >> thank you you'll for your thorough review and i'm pleased you linked the public health division work to this resolution i think this helps at least as you study this helps groub what this is as opposed to everything i don't think - but it builds on the strength that was a nice addition. >> thank you. >> thank you further comments

commissioner taylor-mcghee. >> no sorry no further comments then i echo the very fine work and the responses so promptly it is not easy. >> thank you it is what makes it work. >> we're prepared to >> all in favor, say i. >> i. >> opposed? resolution has passed unanimously thank you. >> thank you, commissioners item 11 other business. >> commissioners any others business you'd like to bring to our attention or we'll move on to the next item. >> 12 is a joint conference committee report and you have a july 28th. >> july 28th was the meeting where mr. pickens was serving as is interim ceo and we reviewed the qualities management and

regulatory reports and ucsf gave an excellent destruction briefly on their education and research program i believe we'll have the power points given to the commission it shows that very high percentages of trainees that went through the ucsf educational program actually intrerdz services into the under served population therefore fulfilling that mission at ucsf general noble in the trained positions but have those available for our underserved population so we'll be getting those slides to everyone we also then reviewed the transition program it has been laid out in very greater detail for projecting that aside from

the ribbon cutting that is designated for december that following that we would continue to be - and that's assuming the pods allows us to proceed to be able to stock our building we would then be undergoing a department of public health inspection from the state for licensing and following that which would have approved our policies and procedures to gun to orient people to our hospital projecting a may date at this point for occupancy patients but that a plan will be continued to be monitored by the joint conference over the next several months department of water & power what the timeline we followed through with the building itself and presentations in a know fashion to be maids to the commission to

broncos you up to date on where we are aside from that in closed session the committee also approved the credentials report and i think if there are any questions i'll be happy to answer any questions not hearing any questions any further joint conference report. >> no public comment. >> item 13 is the committee agenda setting. >> okay. so in agenda setting we will remembered i that we have our planning program which will take up the. >> october 6th. >> where is going to be. >> at dwooi van ness and in the public health department division. >> we'll be going to it during

our planning commission. >> please be prepared for that beginning at 2 o'clock i think it is. >> yes. >> do we have any further unanimous. >> item 14 which is adjournment. >> okay commissioners, do we accept the motion for adjournment. >> i move we adjourn. >> okay there being no objections well, no - i >> all in favor, say i. >> i. >> opposed? this meeting is adjournedyou.

>> ♪ ♪

♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ in landing a contract with the sfoifk is pretty champ but now with the opened contracting center visitors can get opportunity at the new state of the arc facility and attend workshops and receive one-on-one technical assistance and learner what you need to become a primary contractor or what information to be a subcontractor and a created bed public commission it will help people to assist people to compete for and performance open city contract a lot of small businesses do have the resources to loblth the

opportunity so one of the things we wanted to do was provide ways to access contract >> access to the plans spiefkz and a data place basis ease contracting opportunity and funding or capital training. this is and other documents that needs to be submitted. to compete is a technical skill that it takes to win a scheduling for a popular to you can win a professional services job or how to put together a quote it's all those technical pieces. looking at the contracting assistance center is our touch point with we get the people to come and see the planning specks and later than about projects earlier is he get training so

you're ready to go arrest hello engineering it has all the tools that a contractor small or large can come here. i can't say enough about the center it's a blessing. we do business all over the country and world and a place like the contractor center to identify the business in san francisco >> the reality is you need training and that's what the center is here to train and make you better qualified to go work with the city and county and to be successful at the end. >> that will give people the competitive edge e edge at receiving contracts with the city. >> we have krafshth services

here that help you find out where you need to get the skills forbidding. >> i mean local businesses participation in city projects is a winning factor it helms help the business their local businesses they're paying savings and a property tax and payroll tax and normally adhere san franciscans so their bowing goods and services in san francisco it really helps the economy of san francisco grow so its not only a benefit to the project but to the city. the contractors center is 5 thomas melon circle in the bayview area open 8:30 to 5

welcom commissioners, item 2

review of past events of the planning commission staff report and announcements >> again departments that. i have no report for you at this hearing could >> that places under commissioner matus. item 3 presidents report and announcements >> i've no reported >> item 4, consideration of adoption for the store preservation commission interview committee meeting of july 15, 2015. >> any comments or considerations? does any member of the couple public wish to comment on the draft meeting minutes of july 15? seeing none, we will close

public comment. another motion to approve? >> i moved to approve the minutes >> second >> thank you commissioners on a motion to adopt the minutes for july 15, commissioner hasz metadata, pearlman, ionin, and commissioner pres. wolfram >> yes >> that motion passes unanimously 7-0 and places us on item 5. commission comments and questions. >> any disclosures? commissioner johnson >> i have a question about the place making newsletter. that's an interesting we got an e-mail about it. i was curious, for instance, ivan interesting speech on getting to a conference in savanna georgia in october, which is a concept i'm developing, linkage between maritime archaeology in terrestrial historic

preservation in other words together. is that the kind of thing? is that considered a news item or you want to just keep it-activities of the commissioners? >> show. we would welcome any information you have on the presentation and i'll forward it to our communications manager, who will follow-up with you >> right >> commissioner pearlman >> i just want to say i time to read the significant amount of it the newsletter, and it's very well done and it's a very impressive newsletter. so thank you to the department. >> great. seeing no other comments will move on. >> commissioners, that will place us under you were continuous calendar, item 6 case number 2014.1386. the civic center cultural landscape inventory is proposed for continuance to september 16. 2015 i've no speaker cards >> so, this item mr. fry

>> commissioners, i want to give you a quick update on our most recent continuance of this item. i am happy to report we received the final draft of the cultural netscape survey. with all of the commissioners comments and mr. hasz comments address and were currently reviewing again we think it's good to go. in addition to that we found there was a, the necessity to include a little information about the social and cultural heritage of the civic center plaza. most importantly, its recent history. so, we just recently entered a contract with arg to provide additional research during that her back of significance. so, it's really from the 1960s to about the

late 1980s, early 1990s. with that, we hope will be finished in a relatively short period of time. but, we are prepared to bring the cultural netscape survey complete, as you most recently reviewed it to the september 16 hearing if you wish to review it at that time. if you would like to wait for the additional research for civic center plaza, we could always bring most items to you together at a future hearing. but i want to let you know at least the first component is complete. >> questions? does any member of the public wish to speak on the matter of the continuance of this item? seeing none, will bring it back to the commission. do i have a motion to continue? >> almost into continue to september 16 this item. >> second >> thank you commissioners on a motion to continue item 6 to september 16, 2015 commissioner

hasz johnck johns masuda pearlman hibblen and commissioner pres. wolfram that motion passes unanimously, 7-0 voices you under regular calendar. per item 7, case number 2015-0041 case number 2015-004168. des at 350 university st. this is a landmark designation. >> good afternoon, commissioned my name is shannon ferguson planning department staff gave him here to present the dependence recommendation regarding landmark designation of the university mold old ladies home located at 350 regarding landmark designation of the university mold old ladies home located at 350 university st. the building was added to the landmark designation program on october 8, 2014. landmark designation

was initiated on may 20, 2015. the current building that you see here is constructed in 1931, 32 and colonial revival style. replace in brazil building constructed in 1875. the home was originally called the old ladies home. named after james lick left $100,000 and is filled to start a retirement home for elderly women of modest means. it was in business at this current location for 130 years and in 2014 was purchased by genesis and they continue to operate a convalescent nursing home in the building today. the home is architecturally significant as embodiment of the characteristics of the colonial revival style and represents the work of master architect martin j risk and offered i copied. the. of significance was 1931-2014 representing the construction date of the current building to the time period it was owned by the university-it's been suggested

that period of significantly change from 1931, two 1980. so that incompatible alterations are not captured in that significant state. the building does retain a high degree of integrity. it's undergone very few alterations during that time period. there's character defining features on page 24 of the landmark designation report. character defining features such as the living room dining room, and located areas historically publicly accessible. staff has updated the designation report to include an appendix with a brief history of retirement and evolution in the architectural design of retirement homes. also of note, department staff and commissioners from island wicks and johnck met with them at the site and were given a tour of the property. given the

residence or support the designation and supervisor campos has also expressed support. the department believes the building meets the established eligibility requirements and landmark status is wanted. the diamond recommends designation to the board of supervisors. thank you. >> any questions? >> questions? seeing no questions, when we take public comment on this item. any member of the public wish to comment on the designation of the university mound old ladies on? seeing none, will" and bring it back to the commissioners. i would like to report about our visit today. as ms. ferguson said, commissioners johns myself this right in this ferguson all visited the site. we met with madeira-founder of a song with

the executive director i think of the particular site, that particular building. as well as david ross from-who is their architect for some proposed rehabilitation. they stress some concern about the flexibility of them to make changes in the future to accommodate accessibility issues were coding issues. we walked them through the designation reports. they seem to be amenable to designation. they did not express, i guess, i would say they're fairly neutral. i drove the other commissioners had a sense of- >> i think there were more comfortable >> they were comfortable. we also met talk to a few of the residence there as well and a tour of the facility which ms. ms. ferguson said has great integrity. they are planning to

make some changes to improve accessibility at certain locations. we also discussed the potential of changing the front landscaped terrace so that was more accessible. i know there's a set of steps from the building to the driveway. they said they were exploring different ways to that of larger outdoor patio for residents that might change the landscaping in the front setting. then, the potential batting elevators in the reader, changes they were also-i was a the one area that they were discussed the most were the ceilings, the painted stenciled ceilings and whether those could be readily retrofitted to include sprinklers and lighting and other features and whether they might consider putting a drop ceiling instead. that was one

area that was discussed. then, we finally discussed the role of the farc. should this designation be approved. they would have the resources of va rc to come forward to discuss the potential design changes. does that actually are flat- >> as far as i'm concerned. except there was one thing that. there was initially, i thought, some ambivalence on their part and some real questioning, but would we be able to operate this home if it's a landmark? what would this really do? how flexible are you? it seemed to me that was a pretty insightful as to what goes on in the minds of well-meaning people who have never encountered a stork preservation commission before come and probably hurt too many stories about the hbc

destroying every ounce of economic value and other peoples property. as we talked, they seem to warm to the idea and they are really interested in exploring with us what could be done to preserve the parts of the building that are really worth preserving, but would allow the building to operate in the way that it could be economically sustainable. so, i think that what i got the feeling that they really want to work with us and it might -there could be some real benefits to having them on board with this landmark. >> i wonder ms. ferguson as he could walk us through. there was some changes that need to be made based on what we saw today and also mentioned the corrections that i talk to you about earlier.

>> based on our site visit today, there have been some features that have been removed already that were called out in the character planning features in the reports. those include some light fixtures in the living room. i believe the dining room and in the chapel that have already been removed and replaced with contemporary light fixtures. we do believe those-they were original fixtures that been removed. so, that would need to be room changed and the character defining features. >> was there any indication the ones that were taken away still exist? >> undergone? >> unfortunately, they are gone. the ones in the chapel may still be around and could potentially be rewired and reinstalled if they are still available.

>> commissioner johns >> i was curious with the concerns of the owner and maybe ask you if you foresee any particular difficulty. in my expense this is been on the commission, we have been flexible according to the purpose of the facility allows for changes to support the facility and its functions. so i wouldn't necessarily be worried about that. however, if the owner, i guess, were to be prudent to us watch the owner if there are some plans, or ideas that they have for changes, would be prudent to have a meeting with them to further bring them on board. would that be wise? that would be my question. which would

mean maybe a continuance, if there was support for that idea. or, if we do prove if we do approve it now i think would be prudent to meet with them if they have some changes they want to make it or maybe they don't have a plan out? >> i don't think it really drawn out yet. the planning department,-when was this originally provided to the owner? this is been in their hands for a lot while? >> yes. bulimic designation was provided to them well before the initiation hearing on may 20 >> so, the planning department has done quite a bit about reach and i think today perhaps was the first meeting were we had all the parties involved. so, we've if we were to continue the item, i'm not sure what, whether there would be a real benefit or not. i don't know. gemini thoughts about that? >> commissioners, jim frey department staff. my thoughts

earlier after discussing some of these conceptual plans with property owners, that they could really benefit from some design advice from architectural review committee no landmark designation i think would go a long way in facilitating that. so, by the time they come to us with a permit or project or requested we can bring them directly to your design committee to give them the type of feedback. and guidance that i think they could benefit from. >> i have no-i'm ready to move >> commissioner hyland looks >> i don't think we need to continue this. i was impressed with a cared about the building as well as the function in the building. it was under threat about a year ago and this age song brought in some investors to purchase the building and to keep it in its current use and

they even said, at one point, all the character defining features that we were explaining to them that were important, they also felt were important and intuitively would pay attention to those things. that being said, i think we do have some challenges, and so would be definitely beneficial for them to bring not only before the a rc, potentially have a preservation consultant work with them on some alternatives to the strict building codes. >> great. >> yes, i'm ready to move the designation. >> that motion after motion? >> that the motion. i'm ready. i move. >> okay. >> second >> commissioners move the motion to adopt the recommendation for approval on a motion commissioner hasz,

johnck johns matsuda, pearlman hyland looks, wolfram-yes that motion passes unanimously 7-0. >> can i go back to number six or something about the calendar? >> number five we can reopen commission matters >> i just wanted to look at august 19 and there's one item in that september 2 there's nowhere comes. i'm wondering from the staff at things coming up? we talked about having these 20 min. meetings that if we could combine some items to other mediums, that would be quite helpful. >> commissioners, there are number of items especially informational presentations on your august 19 calendar. but i don't know any advanced calendar. to my knowledge, it might be an opportunity to cancel the first hearing in september. i think sec. ionin

was discussing discussing that with commissioner wolfram >> when we wait till august 19. thank you, then. hearing adjourned. >>[gavel].

>> all right. good morning and welcome to our tuesday, july 21, 2015, of the tangs meeting i'm katie tang we have supervisor christensen supervisor breed and supervisor farrell here today, i want to thank sfgovtv jason and others steve. >> roll call