thank you. >> good evening. [inaudible] i submitted written comments may 19 but have the following comments this evening regarding gifts, the proposing gift ban is not needed. the current limit of $25 is so low that cant inpossibly have a crupg corrupting influence on a city officer. the proposed gift ban will prohibit gifts of travel from governmental agency, educational institution or charity for legislative or governmental purpose or related to state, national or international public policies. prohibiting such gifts mean all such travel is funded by the city using tax money used for other critical governmental functions. the

lobbying law also prohibits lobbyist from making a gift exceeding $25. the ethic law prohiblts a auftser to [inaudible] since the ethics law provision is narrow drawn, the commission should take the opportunity to reconcile the two provisions by deleting the lobbyist gift ban with language indicating a lobbyist is subject to gift restrictions in theectics law. regarding contribution limits the amendments bring up the lobbyist from contributing more than $50 regardless if they are registered to lobby. $50 is similar to the states former ban on contributions that was invalidated by the california supreme court

in 1979. the contribution ban was a substantial restriction on the lobest freedom of association and the state failed to demonstrate a important interest or employ means closely drawn to avoid bridgment of associated freedoms. in reaching the decision the court relied on the fact the ban applied to all candidates eerfben though a lobious may not lobby a particular candidate. regarding [inaudible] the ban on the bundling of contributions is not needed since bundleds contributions is subject to detail disclosure requirements. in addition there is fram court precedents a ban on bundling by lobbyist violates the first amendment and green party och connecticut a[inaudible] not only invalidated a ban on lobbyist ntd contribution it was also state

law [inaudible] staif candidates. reaching this conclusion the court state adlimit on the solicitation of permissible contributions prohibits the type of activity that lies at the first amendment-core. that is because it involves speech to solicit contribution on behalf of a candidate is to make a statement. you should support this candidate not only at the polls but with a financial contribution. speech utters during the campaign requires the application of the protection set forth in the first amendment. i urge you to not impose the ban of contribution by lobbyist. >> can i ask a question of you please? on your last points regarding

reporting, could you clarify how in your view reporting on for example, the shanghai and south korea- >> everyone knows who is contributing. under san francisco law out of town trips the elected officials can not take the out of town trips funded by persons other than government unless that information is provided on the report and assume that is how they obtain the recommendation. the disclosure is there. court held providing disclosure is one of the main reasons that you can actually provide the information people need to make decisions whether it is who to

vote for or the decisions being made by the legislative body so disclosure is very important and that-bundling, gifts are all disclosed on lobbying reports. >> so that is disclosure for the benefit of the public but how does that impact the decisions made by the elected official receiving the benefit of a bundled contribution? how does a disclosure get tothat question? >> the official clearly knows the information is being disclosed and i'm assuming most people make decisions in the best interest of the public. if there is a conflict they can't make a decision and the law provides for conflicts under political reform act in san francisco so if there is proper disclosure and no conflict they

should be able to make the decision. thank you. >> thank you. >> ray [inaudible] i like to remind the previous speaker about the fact that the city librarian lieu eshurarea received 5 thousand a year for gifts from outside group he was supposed to provide oversight to and then lied about it year after year after year on a statement of economic interest so if we rely on the fact somebody will report the fact they gave somebody a nice big fat gift of a trip or whatever it was i think we are pinning our hopes on something that isn't dependable. i think many of the previous speakers said what i believe is quh the voters vote, a lobbyist is a lobbyist and don't give a rip to whether they fall into a specific category or not. [inaudible] consequences says the bottom line as you formulate

the change to the law, the lobbyist are looking at the changes you are making and thinking how they will out maneuver you so basically if you leave out one type of lobious i guarantee that next year you may not any this year, you will next year because they are sitting there thinking we are not subject to the law so we'llchange from this lobbyist to that lobbyist and give our money this way instead of that way. that is what everybody is looking at. there are a lot of people that gain the system. they hann money to someone who is supposed to do something and that person fails to do it. the city librarian, thousands of dollars worth of gifts he received and lied about it under penalty of perjury, this is matter of public record and then when and go and say what happened to it $10 million over the last year the group friend of the library raised

and expended, they can't give a answer. they can't tell you where a penny of that money went. the board of supervisors on authorized to accept a gift from that person in the amont of $375 thousand which means 94 cents out of the dollar is going to fund raising. we have seen the public detriment that groups that proport to be supplying or providing gifts and benefits to a group are allowed to raise money and just spend the money on themselves. what i said to the library commission over and over is what we get for the friends is the friends. basically they raise money to support their own operation and if you ask the city librarian, the library commission, show me anything you received from this group that shows what the library got from them

and will tell you there are no responsive documents. so, this needs to be all lobbyist and the fact we need a record is a way of leaving it out and the bottom line is it needs to be done and it needs to cover all lobbyist because that is what the voters will think when they vote. >> thank you. >> my name is greg brian, the attorney and also with represent us. i would just going discuss a few issues i think are important. one is under the gifts section, they removed the ear marking thing in the recommended changes and think it is important people not able to give gift s to a thirdperty and go to the official in the end. that is a

important provision i feel should be back in the proposed legislation. the other thing i want to talk about is regard to the expenditure lobbyist. we have to establish a burden to show that it is needed. i think we should be able to incorporate what we saw with proposition c and what is going on in other jurisdictions if we don't have expenditure lobbyists that are not registered. if they are not registered there is a good possibility following the laws and guidelines and there may be ways to show that is the case. in which case, there would be a way of showing there is some meeting a burden on us to show that is a issue. the last thing i want to say is if we don't address the expenditure lobbyist what will happen is you will get contact

lobbyist and other corporations working ways to circumvent going the expenditure lobbyist route to get around the regulation. there is a $5 olimit is still a limit and not a flat out ban so it is like we can kis cuss like the $50 limit and $500 limit but the fact of the matter it isn't a ban so should meet constitutional definition. they have the requirements. that is all i want to say. i think the legislation is well written and appreciate everybodys time and commitment to this and want to thank you and thank everybody here for all their hard work on this. thank you. >> thank you. i'm going to jump to item number 8, which is a

discussion and possibly action on items for future meetings. the reason i skipped 6 and 7 is both call for the possibility of a closed hearing and we will assuming that the commission votes to go into a closed session we will deal with both 6 and 7 at that time and we will try and deal with the rest of the agenda in advance so people who don't have to sit and wait for us when we come out of closed session to take up these other items. is there any commissioner who has any suggestions of for items for future meetings? i will take public comment on that. hearing none, turn to 9, which is discussion of the

executive drethers report. >> thank you commissioners renne. item 9 is the material summary of the key items from the office over the last month. most notebly good news in terms of the electronic filing e filing conversion project. we received the green light from the information of technology to fund the project for the next two years including staffing. the mayor is expected to announce the june first budget i believe on the 31 and so we expect we'll have more detailed information about the final budget package and as we do we will share that information with you. my sense at this

poipt is we are optimistic there will be strong support for the commission to advance work in the coming years. i wish i had more details but as soon as the budget package is finalized we will get that to. you had 120 applications for deputy director positions. i look forward giving further updates on that soon as we move forward and want to make a note, i regret that to share the highlighter garret chatfields has take an promotional opportunity to move to departmentf opublic health so his last day was last friday and will post that position and trying to fill that as soon as we can. he was a good person and great person to work with. just wanted to note that. >> are we posting both

positions? the one that isn't funded that is authorized but not funded? >> we are prepared to get out the gate as soon as possible on anything for any position. it is a priority to get those then door as soon as we can. >> kooyou have a target gate for hiring the deputy director? >> we are at the end of may, i would love to have someone here at the early part of the fiscal year. i will leave the other information-just a quick note under policy and legislation. the state legislative committee follow up to support sb 1107 is the bill that have the effect going to the voters to enable public financing systems to be created at the local jurisditional level, the committee on state

legislation approved it unanimously and will communicate that to the state lechblg slairt. we will continue the discussion of policy plan for the coming year at the next meeting. simply didn't have the band widt to do the work necessary to bring it fully to this meeting and think the next meeting we will have a realistic sense of the time for that consideration so thank you for your indullgence. happy to answer questions. >> questions? >> yes, mr. pelemsprz regarding to e filing conversion project, since that is funded bithe city, will the commission budget be reduced? >> no the funding is separate and apart from operational budget decisions so that is terrific news >> will then the project be able to get started right away in the

beginning of the fiscal year cephal >> yes we have the nrfgz technology officer who will start that and as soon as we bring on the staff person to assist with that that will be the person involved with the project development and anticipate we will start that as soon as we can. >> great news. >> yeah, thank you. >> public discussion? >> ray san francisco open government. i like to acknowledge the chairs rearrangement of the agenda. i looked and said we will have two closed session squz if the public wants to have the executive directors report and comment they will be denied unless they want to sit and wait at the pleasures of the ethics commission induterminant return from the closed sessions. i would like to point out that one part where we are talking about

garret chatfield leaving. if i understand correctly, the reason we were 69 or 70 complaints behind in investigations is because mr. chatfield and other investigator are only part time positions so we are down to one part time position and i didn't hear a answer when that position will be filled or relating to the one that is open for god knows how long. part the reason your budget didn't go up is because you had a position and didn't fell it and the city will look for low haj ing fruit. you have a position that should be filled and isn't and will take the money away assuming if you don't fill the position you don't need it. i worked with the state government in hawaii and that is how it works you use it when you have the money or you lose it. that is

why i thought it was ludicrous you didn't ask for increase whether everyone else was going ball tooz had wall, everyone in the city everyone was hiring and city employees has risen enormously over the last 6 or 7 years and the ethics commission was sitting with unfilled positions and money to fill them and didn't. we had that discussion but and if the mayor should approve your 30 or 40 percent increase i suggest you dont repeat that bad behavior which is having the position and funding for it and fail toog fill it. my opinion is mr. st. croix left those positions vacant for the intent it would slow investigations. mr. st. croix was well established history of using all sorts of administrative tricks to get

hearings heard in odd ways or not heard at all. i will reaffirm the one that ticked me off is the fact i was a interested party in the ethics commission which was announced the day before i left for vacation and heard the day before i returned. notifying me that hearing would be held. i also like when i say the last word and the bell rings and you ring it and others come up and you let them go on and on and on. >> any other public comment? hearing none, we'll turn to item 6. discussion

and possible action regarding mark farrell versing for district 2 supervisor 2010 versus city and county of san francisco >> do you want to take item 10 prior to going into discussion of closed session? >> approve the minutes? i'm happy to do it but my feeling is that not a item but we'll take 10 and do i hear any motion to approve the minutes as written? >> so moved. >> second. >> moved and seconded. any discussion among the commissioners? any public discussion? >> ray san francisco open government. i like everybody who has the opportunity to review these minutes and see there are two 150 word summaries i provided in the body of the minutes. i

fought long and hard to insure the law which states if a person submits a summary of 150 word or less of public comment it will appear in the minute. as these two do. the reason i fought so long and hard is i was tired having my public comments misrepresented, abridged senseards and otherwise changed bay the cities library commission and basically they would take things and i would write a comment and go to the meeting and they talk about the minutes and i would say this is not what i said. this is exactly the opposite of what i said and what they would do is if they found a comma out of place they change it. if the member the public came up and said my comments are not representative of what they said they ignore that and continue to do that. i put the 150 words in not

because some species people do and say he wants a transcript what is said in the minutes, no but i like it representative because it is constitutionally protected political free speech. the fact a public record is printed by the government and mis represents what a member of the public says is looked at as no big deal. my first amendment and free speech right jz rights under the brown act means something. i don't come here to jap my jaw, i have something that feels needs to be said and it is amauzing how many times i have to fight to say thing jz not be interrupted and fight to have what i actually said represented in a reasonable fashion in the official record. i fought hard for this because the thing where mentioned

several times earlier is the library commissions $80 million shifted through the hands. the public knows nothing about it. $80 million and what did the library get? ask mr. her era and mrs. blackman and the library commission. show us something the library got from the friends. what mr. her era got is he got $75 thousand a year as a [inaudible] fund. money he can pass out as goodies to the staff at the library. no wonder he doesn't get disagreement on that. then he perjures himself and lies that he didn't get anything. >> thank you. seeing no other public comment, call the question, all in favor of approving the minutes for the meeting of april 25?

>> aye. >> opposition? approved unanimously. turning now to item number 9, which is-i mean item number 6, which is a discussion and possible action regarding the mark farrell complaint which was attached to the agenda. i will first raise the question of any commissioner believe this should be in closed session? >> move we go into closed session. >> any second? >> second. >> any public comment? >> ray san francisco open government. i raised objections about this item. it is related to the money that supervisor farrell has been asked to repay. i see the punch by

filing his court case against you so basically you are keeping it hidden from whatever you are doing, keeping it hidden from the public didn't do any good. i like to be frank about something. i was sort of on the sly [inaudible] because i made a remark that something was being pulled or secret deal is done, but i hate to break it to you, that is what the citizens of the city think. when you go into closeed session they do believe there is something going back-on back there and asng the old days where it is like we are honorable people serving here for the god of the citizens of san francisco, that is gone. people don't believe that because most the people appointed to the commissions and boards get appointed because they want aopponented

to another board or commission. the old idea anyone serving their own time is automatically supposed to be assumed as being this above question -cesars wife. above reproach. those days are gone. the more in private session don't be surprised people say i question it. i'm only saying out loud when i question you going into closed session, other people are thinking it, they just don't get up and say it and the reason they don't say it is they know it is a popularity contist. i may be before you with a case at some point and want you to rule in your favor so have to be careful not to say something that puts your nose out of joint. i learned it doesn't make a difference so mine as well be honest about it and say it. closed session is the

perception of the public is you are back there cooking the books mptd i center 24 orders of determination and every one is a violation oof the sunshine ordinance found by the body leaguely counsituteed to hear the matters and decide them and they were members of board, commissions or city agencies decide they would ignore the responsibilities under the law, interfere with my speaking, they were going to misrepresent what i said when i spoke in the official record and they would with hold public records from me which i needed to effectively per sue my first amendment rights. bottom line is, just be aware when you go into closed session, people are watching. >> thank you. >> good evening commissioners. charley again mar stellar for the

record. i want to say i'm glad we have at least seen a little something from mr. farrell but it isn't in person. i would invite him to make a appearance before the body at any time but now that you are in litigation maybe that isn't something his council would advise. i would like a legal opinion and wonder if in closed session you could raise the following question, should you be stood up in the future and say the party did not respond to you with a counter suit or whatever this is technically called, does the commission have the power to fine someone in contempt? and realize there is not a penalty to that, but it seems to me that had we never heard from mr. farrell we would have just been left hanging and i dont thichck think it

was the intent when we wrote the heart in 93 and i didn't personal do that, that was done by mr. shelly and bush, that they intended for you to be stood up or ignoreed and have no re-dress. i think that is a good legal question for you to ask council to research for some future case where this might come up because frankly, up until we finally heard or saw some signal from mr. farrell, we didn't know what he was thinking or what he would have said because he never came to this podium to say a word. he went through proxy and i think that by in itself is in a sense somewhat contempious but he had his

rights with council to act that way, but he is an official of the city and county of san francisco and his standard of behavior and conduct should bow be far higher than the average citizen because he took a sworn oath and that oath i think fundamentally he has violated by his behavior in this manner. that is all i will say. >> call the vote on the motion to go in closed session on the item number 6. all in favor? >> aye. >> opposed? carried unanimously and i will turn to item 7 and discussion and possible action regarding

complaint received or initiated by the ethics commission concerning san francisco campaign and government conduct code section 3.230 prohibition on knowing directly or indirectly soliciting political contributions from other city officers or employees. motion to take that in closed session? public comment? hearing no public comment i'll call the question, all in favor? >> aye. >> opposed? carried unanimously, the commission will go into closed session on items number 6 and 7. my estimate would be that we should have completed that within the next 30 to 60

minutes and we will go back in open session after it is completed.

>> the commission unanimously voted to accept a stipulation on behalf of respondent george gascone.

respondent christine soto debari and michael swart where in they stipulated that they violated section 3.230 which prohibits any city officer for sulitinging political contributions #23r5u78 any other city employee directly or indirectly unless the solicitation is a communication targeted to the significant segment of the public which may include city officers. they stipulated at a fundraising event there were solicitations made of city

employees to mr. gascones campaign, where the bulk if not all of the participants were employees of his office or other city employees. mr. gascone has accepted responsibility and has agreed to pay a fine of $4 thousand for the alleged violation or stipulated violations and mrs. dubari, agreed to pay a fine of $14,000. i mean,

1, 400 and mr. swart agreed to pay the fine of 1, 400. i would say i think it is important for the public to understand that all 3 of these individuals admitting they have violated the section said they were unaware of the prohibition about city employees solicit other city employee and in the case of mr. gascone, he certainly had attended ethics training which contained training concerning the specific prohibition which all

3 of them said that they were really not aware existed partly because they had been solicited by other city employees in the past. hopefully this disposition of these will be a message to all city employees concerning the ban on city employees soliciting other city employees. there were also listed a number of individuals from the office who were part of the host for this fundraiser on november 13 and those individuals, no fines are being assess

against them, but they will receive warning letters reminding them of the ban so that it will not occur in the future. any- >> mr. chair. during the closed session i put on the record at the request of the city attorney that over the years i have had professional contacts with chief and district attorney george gasconon various matters dealing with the cities crimial justice system and it was the sense the commission in regard to those contacts that i have had with him on

those matters that those did not arise to any kind of level of requiring me to recuse myself and the city attorney also agreed that those pasted contacts i had with district attorney george gascon procedurely professional on matters deal wg the cities criminal justice system and did not require me to recuse myself. >> any public comment on the matters that were covered in closed session? hearing none, do i hear a motion to adjourn? >> so moved. >> before we adjourn, i think commissioner addrews wants to make a statement. >> thank you chair. i should have made it before closeed session because now

my audience is gone. i did want to take the opportunity to say what a honor it has been serving on the commission over these past 3 years and want to thank the commission while i was on a steep learning curve at the same time quit interested in good government and it plays out so much in our personal and professional lives and continues to be clear to me with my service here. i am empressed with the work we have done thus far. with the passing of prop c and with chair renne and myself servings as a commission of two and commission support and hiring executive director pelumand continue to be impressed with her. throughout that process i had a opportunity to

spend some time with your staff, your now staff and i recognize the level of dedication and commitment and passion they have for the work and their high level of skill and it looks like a great partnership you will have with them and encourage you to create professional opportunities for them as often as you can. to commissioner chiu, sorry i didn't have a opportunity to work with you. i know in the few comments and the few amounts of work we have done together that i know that the commission will be well served by your seat, so thank you for your service in advance. i did want to say that i took last month to assess the work at my organization and recognize that there were increasing demands and those

increasing demands were not going to go away any time soon and know the commission deserves someone who has the time and energy it needs to commit to this very crucial work and i knee i wasn't going to be able to do that in the way i feel good about and frankly for what the commission deserves so it is with heavy heart i do stand down and i look forward to sitting in the odd ynss audience on the other side and continue to know about the work on the commission and want to thank everybody for their collegeial friendship along the way and wish you all best wishes. >> thank you. likewise we wish you good luck and best wishes in the expanded endeavor. i will be interested to hear how it goes. >> thank you. >> i will now entertain a

motion to adjourn. >> so moved. >> second. >> public discussion? no comment? alright, the meeting is adjourned. [meeting adjourned] >> are we ready good afternoon

ladies and gentlemen, good afternoon my name is supervisor cowen the chair and this is the regular meeting of land use committee to my right is commissioner weiner the vice chair and our clerk clear and thank to charles kremack and others for broadcasting this meeting electronic devices. completed speaker cards and documents to be included should be submitted to the clerk. items acted upon today will appear on the june 7, 2016, board of supervisors agenda unless otherwise stated. >> thank you very much call hematemesis one ac. >> amending at planning code for the rooftop screening. >> the planning department is the sponsor of this item we have a staff person from the planning department to present.

>> we're ready. >> good afternoon chair cohen and honorable supervisors tilly chang department staff this is the planning code for the controls to two spate areas of planning code the map controls and rooftop park screening with the clean up of applicability of the controls expanded regarding this roof deck the amendment increases the flexibility of the controls as written it is the large project authorization in the south of market mixed use and over 200 linear feet to create pedestrian friendly zones for expanding the 3 adjacent districts the fulton nct some

and nct and regional commercial district what adapted did controls apply for the district for the mid block alley are - the boards wants to expend them to all eastern neighborhoods south of market mixed use and south of market c-3, however, the 50 percent was not stent for the central district and more xhvn to the city this ordinance amended the planning codes for the mid block alley are applicable in all the aforementioned additionally this may occur on middle-income alley and centralize will be amended so some projects with street or alley frontages are currently the case in the following 3 go things shown in orange are the areas where the middle-income alley

controls apply in blue the additional location for the allocations this graphic is the cemetery running north-south and fulsome nct jefferson east west this map the additional areas where the middle-income that the western nct returning east west and the general northbound finally this map shows other areas the middle-income involves controls with the urban and the mixed use in the southeast parts of city the second part of the amendment is lou gehrig's disease for flexibility to be clear the flexibility is not carolyn's permitted and requires a venue review with the section 309 as written the planning code 0 policies for this is not only adequate for the equipment or allow for better urban design and curling have an enclosure -

this proves consistent with the buildings overall design and projects any choose to provide a screen without a set back r setback, however, it is reduced by 25 or 50 feet it height can - screened and the height of many mechanic features 50 feet or more providing for flexibility allowing third street the height of 20 feet up to one hundred rather than 75 percent and the flexibility is not californian permitted and requires the planning commission for the project and large project authorization that concludes my presentation. i'm available to answer any questions. >> public comment thank you for your presentation. >> open up for public comment at this time just as a reminder everyone has two manipulates a 30-second chime indicating soft chime you

have thirty sections remaining public comment is up seeing none, public comment is closed a motion on that item. >> supervisor wiener do you have a motion thank you. the motion to forward workers' compensation and without objection that motion carries. >> mr. clerk i'd like to call items two and three together. >> the resolution for the intention the board to order the vacation of portion of jessie street with the ocean wide in 3 of the ordinances to establish the denounced neighborhoods with the street vacationed of alley for a total of $36 million. >> all right. thank you very much someone from the mayor's office to present on this item. >> mr. buckly.

>> good afternoon supervisors i'm jeff from the mayors staff to talk about the 51 street project as long as ocean wide give you a brief update or overview of the project and in addition that give you an opportunity to hear about an interesting aspect of the project which is the urban rum we'll have the project sponsor come up for that 3 to 5 minutes go through the concept and the need and i think you have a array of city staff to take any questions you may have on the amend e item, however, large or going forward i wanted to start off by talking about the project so 41 street is a mixed use

project at the northeast corner of first street and mission for one million square feet of total office space 200 and 64 units, one hundred and 69 room hotel and ground floor retail and pub opted open space to two towers this space received its approval from the planning commission on may 5th who's before you the street vacation of own alley and a portion of jessie street and also in addition to that some of the details of the downtown preservation fund i'll be happy to with you on so the main reason for the legislation before you the vacation of jessie which is necessary in order to build the administrator tower to the height contemplated in the

district plan that was adopted in 2012 the plan is a comprehensive vision for shaping and growth in the southern side of downtown the transit center focuses on regional growth towards downtown san francisco and in a sustainable manner for the sculpting thought you tower and the extra and improvements to the streets and the open space as the parks downtown in order to make that happen it includes the clarification of parcels in the area to increase height limits and including a landmark tower from the transit center from one thousand feet and several other nearby sites with 6 to 8 hundred and 50 feet the plan leverages the intent to generate revenue for the transportation facilities including the support for the

new transit center and downtowns improvements of the sidewalks and other infrastructure to create a public realm so some of the think interesting aspects of this project just so you're aware of that includes some of the one time fees that are generated from the project again this is not the issue about you but important to understand the project in general estimated to generate one and $17 million fees those fees are die construction dot net for an issuance of november 2016 this is about one $.9 million for downtown parks and 2. $9 million for school and childcare millions and sustainability fee and talk about did affordable housing

consultant in addition to the downtown lease but the transit center is 11 want 9 with the transportation street is 3747 so the issue before you is the street and authorization to create the new downtown preservation fund so the i wanted to first talk about with you the purchase for jessie alley so this is the purchase price is $22 million, about 22.6 to be exact providing the closings doesn't occur beyond or before the effective date which will be $33 million plus and in addition to that in partial consideration the city's agreement to sell the property

the buyer will produce the 20 percent inclusionary fees that maybe applicable under the san francisco planning code section to 33 percent affordable housing fee the affordable housing payment as it is known and the city will waiver the portion the downtown program as well for this the fee buyer will pay for the project under the planning code but we've essentially down is create this fund and fees and kept them one a mile radius to the principle project and dictated those for purposes of acquisition and in that one mile area that fund will be in use for no less than 10 years and acquire administrative code by the mayor's office of community development that is a brief

discussion i think the purpose for us being here i want to invite a representative of the project sponsor to come up for about 3 to 5 minutes to discuss the urban room development and how it relates to the street vacation for the context. >> thank you, mr. buckley welcome. >> good afternoon, supervisors with reuben, junius & rose representing the project sponsor for the ocean wide center we're going to keep our focus specifically on the items the street vacation component and the ordinances that allows the direction of some of the affordable housing development impact fees for the community in the big picture the project has

approve patterson's within the past month including the planning commission approval on may 5th when the entitlements were approved it includes the 5 thousand square feet of area that is fronting jesz i didn't street and the additional we're here for the recommendation on the vacation component and as i said on the use of required and voluntary affordable housing impact fee payments so quickly i want to mention on the street vacation the fact we're asking to vacate or with the existing streets and mean we'll have access public assess around the project prompt and in reality you think that is the case with respect to jessie street terminates at one street and in conjunction with the street vacation creating a number of

easements that allows the project assess for a pedestrian cross and throughout the site so one of the key reasons this is this the driving the open room a pubically assessable open space that is on first street and the dedicated parts of jessie street within the urn area the second component before you is the creation of downtown neighborhoods preservation fund that allows the project job linkage fee and the 20 percent of affordable housing fee and an additional 13 percent affordable housing to be directed and used within a mile radius of the site more affordable housing purposes so i the now i'm going to turn it over to to my colleague b that will talk about the visible

where the streets radio located our entire team is here and available to answer any questions you may have. >> hello. >> hello, i'm carmen yee for the ocean wide project can we switch so we're talking about the benefit quite a low the project is part of transbay redevelopment we called the transit redevelopment plan the district plan and two towers two hundred and 65 units actually unit one hundred and 69 hotel and one office space that the whole project is about mixed use project so the project at the corner of mission street on the north and west corner

and the basics design concept we tried to bring create a friendly place for the city so to achieve that together with surrounding environment with the transbay center the south tower and alley we tried to implement our project and to keep the passages through jessie street and the alley and create a connection from the mission to jessie to the hotel so inside of the passage is transit development plan we add more and also, we exhaustive jessie center of the middle-income passenger way so the towers are over the heart of the urban space we call the urban room

this is the designation for the neighborhood for the visitors and the users for this site so everyone has a friendly open to the public open space and have the fully assess passage to connect to it. >> so here's an animation we wanted to show you so take into account of time to load. >> so the basically concept is a traditionally central core which leads and on the ground floor to the floor is open and jessie street turned 90 degrees by doing that we have a fully opened pedestrian friendly your honor, room space for the city for the neighborhood and for the

project itself so the project that we mentioned the jessie streets turned 90 streets all of jessie will keep open for emergency vehicle and long trucks so this is the design idea for this your own room one hundred and 16 by 200 plus with a high 6 feet 8 feet the urban room will have the functioning side to besides the setting back and you can do performance and gathering and art exhibition and night things and this you urban room is open for the public and again jessie street turns 90 feet, however, keeping the inteshgz through the urban

design and through the security cars to carefully maintain the city for this urban use so this is a diagram that shows the vacation this is basically partial of the jessie street and partial of the ed dom alley as it is by doing this we will achieve 3 goals one we create a landmark tower with benefits for the city, second we achieve the much enriched to the pedestrian middle passage for the neighborhood and third we achieve the 26 thousand open space which for the opens for the city for the neighbors and for the folks.

>> that's it. >> okay. thank you. >> mr. buckly something in closing. >> we are here and have city staff to answer any questions. >> i don't have any supervisor wiener didn't have any i'd like to go straight to public comment and call of ms. christie wong (calling names). >> hi supervisors christie wong and policy director for spur thank you for the opportunity i want to urge you to allow ocean wide center project to happen it is a key component as a build out of the corridor this plan is

seekocus regional growth in the right place and invest in transportation and will prohibition, of course, the downtown so we firmly believe that this location is the right place for growth due to proximity with the regional transit as the center of regional employment people that work in downtown san francisco are the most frequent users of travel and it is important that the john updyke has placed like this and permitted opportunity in downtown 90 san francisco it is targeting the dense development and this ordinance is necessary for the development to happen also just want to applaud all of the contributions this development will make on a revenue side both the one time and voluntary and on an ongoing basis and just don't take those

opportunities - don't underestimate i have you to keep this and now ms. grace to speak. >> thank you, ms. grace. >> thank you thank you for your time i'm one of the residents at the one acre located here and i wanted to propose one of the concerns the neighborhood as well as people that take public transportation my understanding we currently have two streets that are actually allow the trucks deliveries here and here to make a round on to the first street and on to mission street for the jessie street in the

future to go this way to have the street going this way what that impact would be the truck delivery will have to make a round into the mist and to the streven son street for the first street and the impact is the neighbor on the division street is congested on that street as well as for market street we know that the subway train and muni trains are underneath and i asked for the supervisors to consider what will be the impact if by the divert the traffic to market street as well as i see that today, we have 5 lanes on the first street as well as mission street taking one lane out of that will be is a savior nightmare i have an article

talking about what is the traffic today roe vs. wade the bay bridge which we know is acquit congested so i'd like to ask the supervisors to consider that location thank you very much. >> thank you, ms. sheryl davis. >> good afternoon. thank you for this opportunity to speak just reilly wanted to speak from a community perspective and show the appreciation being in the western edition and being in the opinion of some folks ignored and working with the large african-american population that is awesome to have someone take an interest in san francisco as a city not just in yards regarding to where they're doing their development the displacement that is happening citywide and is great to see folks coming up and trooib

trying to work with us with the community members and people have a place to learn and grow and at this point looking at the development so i was grateful that they came and sought us out to support this city but they can support this community and i just wanted to recognize that a lot of times things go unnoticed and everything going on nationally and locally folks to reach out when they didn't have to their commitment and dedication much like you supervisor cowen great your doesn't the to the dedication and again, i recognize them and want to thank them and recognition they've reached out to folks they didn't have to and shown an interest and makes it so is thank you. >> thank you, ms. davis. >> next speaker, please. >> michael. >> good afternoon, supervisors

i am want to take the opportunity to speak in support of the downtown neighbor preservation fund and the ocean wide center development i'm michael the deputy director of the african-american museum with the regularly us hotel from the ocean wide site and want to welcome the possibility of the cultural challenge with the ocean wide project we've seen the engagement power community benefit and hope that ocean wide will attribute to the sustaining of the businesses for arts and athlete in the neighborhood ocean has shown they're reaching out and turning over the amount and two folks share the goals of the tour with director linda harrison and myself we've waved

their enthusiasm for the ocean project and motivated to continue to serving the community across the city with the be sure and the world and expand that reach with the sdprikts in san francisco and the neighborhood you see a growing number of new residents and families that want to welcome to the neighborhood and surrounding areas with the museum into the design open space plan at ocean wide called the urban room missouri has visited the office and well accepted we look forward to continue in our conversation with them about activating the space for the art performance and humanities program this an unprecedented opportunity we urge you to support this legislation thank you. >> thank you. >> next speaker >> good afternoon, supervisors

my name is michelle i'm director the programs with the united playaz and to support this project this is a huge disconnect what happens on mission street and after 6 we were existed they reached you did to our clubhouse and working together we're excited about any improvements that had happen in our community united states of america it is a neighborhood we need everything to make the streets more liveable for the people we serve so we're just excited about the potential for new open space and finding ways that we can continue to bring that community to the folks and happy with how much they are interested in hearing that community voice and learn from our he experience and just reilly incorporating the needs for the community and projects

not only office workers during the day but people that live there and eddy and chang they're excited for the community and struck a chord that means the sthaung same thing to us we're looking forward to them being our neighbor thank you. >> thank you very much >> next speaker. >> good afternoon. i'm nora the associate correct and crossroads and we hope you'll consider our experience when we do the project it is a organization for homeless youth in san francisco for 16 years we've moved people off the streets ocean wide reached out to us earlier this year to let us know they're interested crossroads is not a high proliferate not a lot of flexibility and many organizations that help with the

pr because of their size are because of their public profile we're not amongst those organizations those who engage with us want to make a difference in the community and a couple weeks later the folks met with us and folks that want to meet with us they expect us to come to them and it's superficial this is not the case with eddy and chang they asked thoughtful questions and wanted to learn about our clients and homelessness in san francisco after meeting we've challenged pollutant e-mails and they've made generous donations in 2017 we'll move to jegs i didn't and third street about two blocks away from this development and it is essential to have strong engagement with the community and serve our

clients we're still in the early stages of relationship our experience are extremely positive and excited to have them as neighborhoods. >> item? at this point public comment is closed. at this time, i'd like to give the milk to deputy city attorney that has an announcement for the committee today. >> john from the city attorney's office to the call of the chair item 3 on page 11 and there just minor amendments to point out how how the new fund is created and has a basement anytime amount is $40 million and depending on the final build out and the design

we don't know the exact numbers so those amendments point out there will be no less than $40 million. >> great a think simple amendment thank you. >> a motion to accept the amendment by the city attorney john. >> okay theology. >> thank you the motion accepted that is an unanimous acceptance. >> madam clerk so i you understand that i'd like to take a motion to accept not only the amendments but 0 move forward this item with a positive recommendation to the full board. >> item 3 is referred to without recommend to the ordinance for july 19th i believe. >> yes. that's correct that works. >> july 19th.

>> so without objection that motion carries thank you all right. madam clerk, is there any additional business to come before this body? >> yes on item number 2 recommendation out of formal. >> i'd like to make a motion to move forward workers' compensation without objection additional business to come before this body? >> there's no further business. >> thank you this meeting is adjourned

>> i want to welcome everyone here today and today, we are signing this very important piece of legislation and let me begin by thanking supervisor wiener so far his instead of leadership the sponsoring the legislation that will raise the minimum angle for anyone purchasing tobacco products and e cigarettes to the average 24 and that will take effect on july 1st of this year i know that supervisor wiener along with his co-sponsors supervisor mar and supervisor cowen and supervisor farrell and ultimately the entire board had a adopted this and this i know that the supervisors with working closely with our duty 0 who has been documenting why it is showing so important to continue our efforts as a city

if not as a state to continue be rooiktd the access to cigarettes particularly at journeying or younger ages that is advocated by the groups like the tobacco free coalition i want to thank them they're not just here in san francisco but the entire region and all over the country working with the health department making sure that supervisor wiener and not only pay attention it the science and data it is going on but that we do our best to end the suffering that is brought by by long-term smoking that obviously is the cause of cancer and asthma and heart disease we do our best to educate the public in doing so

if not the industry that sells overseeing products and ultimate our kids are your family when in their 18 and 19 is shown that the coalition has shown over and over you're putting that some 95 percent of long term smokers had begun smoking at the age of 18 perhaps younger and as certain under the age of 21 those habit are so hard to end voluntarily so that's why we have to go to many other front to try to do this and that's why i think that the supervisor wiener has found a person cause and public health health cause if the violation kriebs the department of health to make sure that we do what we can to end our these diseases as

much as we can to make sure that we also reflect as the mayor of the city if we can save a lot of money if we are able the medical systems we have to have in place it treat cancer and asthma with smoking is an incredible experience to the public safety the cleaner air with the coalition work on families that second-hand smoke impacts this has another critical reason why we want to do as much as we can and i think we're on the overview we know that supervisor wiener is already in contact with the governor's office as we are and with his the 1184 particularly senator leno and

senator henry's to insure that the state which maybe hopefully in our minds the second to join hawaii to end the sales of tobacco products and less people under 9 age of 21 it doesn't make it right because your 21 you buy tobacco products wild to end it. everyone hopefully with the adult level of age 21 that people make better health decision tore themselves and their family so i take this opportunity to thank the coalition i know that in looking at the data as they have done in working with us this year was a strong sense interest the data it the smoking rates are higher amongst people of closer and amongst the let the record reflect community and other xhucht we rank it with a hard

impact sales work that is done by tobacco industry the may or may not lgbt community that's where we really have good data to show that the more we do to educate your communities be about this the better off we'll be so with all that background i want to say to supervisor wiener you have again showing the good leadership i'm going to give the pen avenue we sign this your accumulate more pens than anyone but thank you for your leadership and also working with such important groups like the tobacco free coalition supervisor wiener i'd like to invite you up here to say a few words >> thank you, mayor ed lee i'll give that pen to the advocates and the district for

they're really horroric work tutor sing a song full of the hope that the present has brought us; 24 legislation in a way that highlights this critically important issue san francisco for many years has been on the cutting-edge of public safety whether around hiv or led pant and sugar sweetened beverage whatever the case weave been from the forefront and once again we are in the fire hydrant of what i hope will be a tile waive of proving health legislation that eliminates tobacco use in this country this is a huge problem we've been involved in a 50-year struggle but with the tobacco city that produces a product with no benefit whatsoever that

kills a half a million people every year 34 is a serious issue and serious punting kiss i'm proud we live in a city where we can be on the cutting-edge where the politics of this city allows us at city hall to make good progressive policy i also want to say we know we're up against a very well financed component the tobacco destroy for decades has fought ever effort to try to control tobacco use and enemy linkage between their pursuit and the health we know that hillsborough tried to do that they have spent their legislation after an expensive lawsuit by the tobacco industry we in san francisco are willing

to fight that fight that is amount about our city thank you to the department of public health we sometimes don't roles e releases how lucky with the best putting department that supports our efforts to make good laws that vascular critical exercise an amazing agency and our advocates for give us the political spouse space to to be able to do this and as the mayor adu u. >> you allowed we passed that legislation a week and a half good and the law jam the state assembly broke we that republicans willing to raise the tobacco age to 21 to pass senator leno's forward-looking bill to make sure that cigarettes are tobacco are still

a way to get addicted to nicotine and will you the tobacco tax it is a huge step forward i hope goes to the governors desk thank you, everyone (clapping.) so are we ready to safe so far lives i'll add one mount reason not in my notes or the legislation but it is about my history about 10 years ago a mayor asked me to pick up cigarette butts as a public works decorator i say to all the public works staff that work hard if there was less settings that's another reason to sign on the legislation; right? yes all right.

(clapping.) (laughter). >> today's date is - >> 16. >> that's it all right.

>> good afternoon -- excuse me, good morning and welcome to the san francisco planning commission special meeting for thursday, may 19th, 2016. i would like to remind members of the public to silence any mobile devices during this proceedinging rho, commissioner president richards. commissioner antonini. >> here. >> commissioner hillis >> and commissioner moore? we do expect commissioners johnson and wu to arrive at some point. commissioners, today on your special calendar item 1 public comment on matters to be considered for discussion in closed session. i have no speaker cards. >> any public comment for item no. 1? okay public comment is closed. >> item 2, consideration -- consider adoption of motion

on whether to assert the attorney-client privilege regarding matters listed below on your agenda as conference with legal counsel. >> commissioner antonini. >> so moved. >> do i hear a second? >> second. >> thank you, commissioners on that motion then to assert attorney-client privilege, commissioner ain'tioni. >> aye. >> commissioner hillis . aye. >> commissioner moore. >> aye. >> commissioner richards. >> aye. >> and commission president fong. >> aye. >> that passes unanimously 5-0 and i will now move to go into closed session. so >> thank you sfgovtv so item 4 following the closed session the planning commission will report on any action during the closed session and consider a motion whether or not to disclose any

items. >> commissioner moore. >> a motion to assert the attorney/client privilege not to disclose. >> second. >> thank you, commissioners there is a motion there is a motion that has been seconded to not disclosure any part of discussions during closed session commissioner antonini commissioner hillis commissioner johnson commissioner moore commissioner wu and commissioner vice president richards and commissioner president fong so moved, commissioners, that motion passes unanimously 7 to zero. >> and i will report in open session no action was taken by the planning commission okay. >> so no other items on the agenda we'll adjourn this meeting. >> the meeting is

2016, 2016, disruptions of any kind. proceedings. and when speaking before the commission, if you care to, do state your name for the record. i'd like to call roll at this time. commissioner president fong commissioner vice president richards commissioner hillis commissioner johnson commissioner moore commissioner wu commissioner antonini is present just not at the place at the momentum commissioners, that places you under your is items proposed for continuance pennsylvania street

large project authorization is proposed middle september 2016 and item 2 cambridge street the conditional use authorization is proposed for inner definite continuance commissioner further on our agenda we've received a request to continue items 10 ab and 1y69d through bryant street conditional use authorization and large project authorization to june 2nd. >> okay. thank you. >> any public comment on this item? now 3 items proposed for continuance? >> i do have two speaker cards for 2000 bryant items 10 ab,

however, at this time you can only submit testimony on the matter of continuance. >> (calling names). >> hi jordan davis he support the continuance one thousand percent. >> david gibson i support of continuance one thousand percent thank you. >> michael san francisco counsel most of i have a copy of the letter i didn't produce 7 copies one is short sorry but we also support the tun we wish it were a couple of weeks

longer than or longer but can work through issues with the developer if they're willing to come to the table and work with us we look forward to that prospect thank you. >> hi commissioners most of you heard from me way two of this week i support a continuance i was here hoping it would be much longer two weeks i thank you for considering that message coming out that the developer should sit down with the labor and community alliance that has formed more resources to bring to the table and also has increased needs for this type of project to really be scrutinized considered on all the impacts that will have between this project and the

other 2000 luxury units in the pipeline i urge you to consider postponing this further i've been asking for them to sit down building what the chronicle said do mayor was unaware of a proposal for the last month a lot going on in the mayor's office i don't understand i want to sit down with the mayor's office of housing as they clearly are dealing with the developer i want to marry community - help facilitate these negotiations we would like to sit down and discuss we have many, many people coming on their way by the way, we only just now heard the continuance it grant and have heard that was grand after our testimony please be prepared at general public comment there are a couple hundred people coming i urge you

giving us more time beyond june 2nd thank you. >> good afternoon, commissioners steve with mary tell on behalf of the project sponsor we don't object to a time longer i understand your calendar we're not in opposition of the continuance thank you. >> is there any additional public comment on the items proposed for continuance. >> my name is rick hall i support a continuance i believe that a month would be much more appropriate than two weeks i think i certainly agree that the developer and the community should sit down together but i'll also got another

southern with the rp e i don't think that can be approved what the information provided as far. >> sorry to interrupt you but at the point in time we can only speak to the matter of continuance. >> i understand. >> is there any additional public comment? >> okay not seeing any, public comment is closed. commissioner antonini. >> well, i'm happy to see an offer that has project that might help to fund perhaps a few more affordable units that make the project an even better project in my opinion it is a very good project it would be nice if we heard about that a couple dares earlier it is important we continue to the second of june i think the generous offer we'll

find out is legitimate. >> what it about encompasses and hopefully without changes to the project as it is new designed this is laid out with that, well with the exception of more affordable units and so i'm going to move to continue to june 2nd. >> second. >> second. >> as well as the other items. >> along with yeah, all the other - >> commissioner. >> you went for all the items to continue. >> well - call them separately. >> items one and two i believe. >> thank you. >> second. >> commissioner vice president richards. >> just a question for the gentleman. >> you asked for longer two weeks what can you get done in two weeks.

>> if discussions are fairly intense and information is adequately forthcoming get quite a bit done with a specialist organizations that may take longer but we may know at the end of two weeks. >> i'll - i will ask of you and the gentleman to coming out to a point you feel like i need more time let us know beyond june 2nd. >> thank you commissioner moore. >> excuse me - i'd like to remind us next week a holiday no ability to influence if it there are changes to any of the documents they are to be in the department within a significant in the amount of we shouldn't forgot that has a realistic date for the people to talk.

>> commissioner hillis. >> yes. i'm also supportive of the continuance a lot of the issues have sorry about that out there and on the table we'll have either resolution or know through is not resolution and make decisions at the commission i'm supportive it urges the parties to work with that goal of trying to resolve this in the next two weeks. >> commissioners, if there's nothing further, we'll move on to there is a motion that has been seconded to continue items. >> sorry commissioner moore. >> i'd like department to lay out the timeline the decisions have to be made and the documents that need to be filed in the commission. package i was caught in agreeing to a continuance on a project only to realize that the clause of submittal was impossible to meet

with a holiday in between or someone is out of town i want to be realistic. >> because itself calendar of required submittals is the holiday next thursday effects what we do. >> just so you know technique your another meeting not a holiday if there are contextual changes we'll make sure those get to you in advance my sense from what i'm hearing i learned of this today it is probable not architectural issues if there are we'll gets to you next thursday. >> or the commissioners, if there's nothing further, we'll move on to then there is a motion that has been seconded to continue items as proposed commissioner antonini. >> commissioner hillis commissioner johnson commissioner moore commissioner wu

and commissioner vice president richards and commissioner president fong so moved, commissioners, that motion passes unanimously 7 to one commissioners that commissioners, that places you under your your exceptional or extraordinary one item to be route by the planning commission and commission. there will be no separate discussion of these items unless a member of the commission, the public, or staff so requests removed from the consent calendar and considered as a separate item at this or a future hearing. item 3 van ness after a conditional use authorization i have no speaker cards. >> any public comment on one item on the exceptional or extraordinary not seeing any, public comment is closed. >> move to approve. >> second. >> thank you commissioners on that motion to approve commissioner antonini commissioner hillis

commissioner johnson commissioner moore commissioner wu commissioner vice president richards and commissioner president fong so moved, commissioners, that motion passes unanimously 7 to zero and places us under commission matters item 4 consideration of draft minutes for the may 5 joint hearing and a regular hearing any public comment on the draft minutes not seeing any, public comment is closed. and anyone like to make a motion to draft minutes. >> thank you, commissioners commissioner antonini commissioner hillis commissioner johnson commissioner moore commissioner wu commissioner vice president richards and commissioner president fong so moved, commissioners, that motion passes unanimously 7 to zero and places us under item 5 commissioners questions or comments. >> go commissioner vice president richards. >> i just wanted to let the

public know in your packet this week the 2014-2015 annual report anything you want to know about planning, building and historic preservation i urge to go online and see a copy of 3 thanks. >> commissioner antonini. >> also in the packet this week information on possible legislation proposed for short-term rentals and i will assume that will come before us for further hearings. >> i was going to talk about during any public comment. >> okay. thank you. >> commissioner johnson. >> thank you very much new topic so my understanding we're moving forward on the joint hearing with the mta i've been talking about for two years i'm happy and start on a new topic

talking with developers and asking them why are we paying the childcare fee rather than potentially providing oversee services on site and a lot of the time the answers is because no physical ability to have childcare facilities on a lot of the sites because of the rules around how much open space you have to have how much internal exposure and other public uses, etc. i'd like to ask a request for a memo or even potential hearing, talking about the childcare facility and how the planning code and a are building code helps us or not getting this off the ground more childcare facilities in san francisco. >> okay. >> commissioners, if there's nothing further, we'll move on to department matters director's

announcements. >> thanks jonas good afternoon, commissioners one of the things we've learned over the years many of the requirements are in state law i'll be happy to separate what kinds of controls versus what the city controls. >> any sf maybe not seen a developer that has a clear understanding of all the restrictions and great to have if in place. >> with respect to the short-term rentals legislation, of course, you spent a lot of time on this last year the proposed legislation is an amendment to the short-term rentals legislation which lives in the administrative code not not planning code so technically didn't require our hearing a short timeline not recommended a hearing because it covers many of the issues the commission

discussed last year and the commission weighed no on it last year and many, in fact, all the substance of the legislation were issues you reviewed last year that was our thought we that we prepare the memo outlining the details but then the board that talk take up this pretty quickly in the next couple weeks and just so summarize to a legislation quickly it would modify - hold one of the things that will do the commission discussed hold the platforms responsible for the outer register we discussed it last year it would also grant citation authority to the planning department for short-term rentals and provide for penalty and so forth those are issues that were discussed last year at

the this commission are the thinking in speaking with the president and vice president we because that was part of administrative code it went back to the board that concludes my remarks. >> i'll assume because the election in 2015 was no a chartered amendment not require a vote of the public to make alternative transportation to the short-term rentals law was in effect it can be done by the board. >> that legislation good evening pass last year. >> i know it didn't pass. >> but i'm saying that you know it wasn't chartered and not passed it goes to the voters. >> seismic. >> quick point of clarification when you say the citation authority is the department part the short-term

rentals enforcement or a separate unit. >> the proposal will the office of short-term rentals but improve the enforcement capabilities. >> thank you. >> on review of past event of board of appeals and the historic preservation commission. >> good afternoon commissioners aaron starr, manager, legislative affairs. at that weeks land use they heard the landmark for the alameda integer hospital located on the excelsior outer mission a landmark for the hpc voted to recommend it to the board on march 16 of this year it was part of the system of emergency hospitals that became known as with an of the most comprehensive in its time constructed in 1933 the alameda was the final piece not system and rendering in spanish is

colonial both were designed by a master architect charles that oversee the schools and hospitals in the city a further note the internal are pained in 1934 if i noted person bernard who painted the library mural at coit tower and opening marine corp's by supervisor avalos several members spoke in support and voted to forward a positive recommendation to the full board of supervisors. >> at the full board this week supervisor kim's ordinance that allows accessory massage in the north of math arranged district had its second reading and the appeal for 1066 market was continued there were two introductions of note the first was a note

sponsored by supervisor peskin and the planning department to clarify the noirnl exempted from regulations if august 6th and increases the penalties for repeat violation of the advertising signs and shows the time for advertising violation will accrue and penalties that go unpaid the second ordinance this sponsored by supervisor kim and really 1066 math with inclusionary housing requirements exempting certain floors in the calculation of grow floor and transfers the requirement and has land dedication at no cost that concludes my presentation. >> thank you commissioner antonini. >> yeah. i had a question consideration given to historical recognition of entry

dirty harry was filmed there. >> what was the building. >> it was like alameda emergency there is a small emergency hospital on it is an none street. >> already a landmark. >> it already is. >> okay. i think that thank you very much. >> and the board of appeals did meet two items of interest the first 88 arkansas you heard the land use and transportation on march third one of the components was a unit mix exception that provided the rental housing number of units are nestled bedrooms that don't many even though the current zoning administrator the appeal in in regards the appropriate

standards for review up until last year the references was for the various finding the commission must make the same preliminary for part of code clean up and we actually - that was removed those standards don't apply that's how you received and filed. reviewed that we'll be bringing up this correction to put those finding and then related or similar legislation that is schedule on june 16th so a lot of discussion about that at the hearing of the board unanimously upheld that was appropriate he didn't error in discussion on 66 third street a notice of violation penalty issued last year this was in relation to an action in 2014 that was a legalization proposal to have the conversion

from warehouse to office the commission approved it and submitted the office allocation with the commission approval to the upper storehouses of the building using the appeal the appellant was used historically and plagues if 1997 been the same owner since 1962 and 1987 they stated these were the buildings warehouses and grand to retail there was a special restriction and no permit inform establish the office use and a couple of years with a process to legalize the decision no appeal it was final we pursued the enforcement insuring our decision was perfect and last night the appellant agreed that were treated definitely and we

went across the street that had been approved the board had questions why this was different from that the project i need some changes in our policies in terms of pdr and also concerns with offense allocation and doing resources in that important decision you approved that but a small captation in our approval the board last night postponed until december 7th they didn't state the exact reason why part of the two-fold one to give the project sponsor time to address the violation with the uses and also to see what maybe in store for the property corridor central soma corridor rezoning i

pointed out they're not likely to change still needs an office allocation make a permitted rather than a conditional needs to come back before you but we'll update you in december on that item thanks. >> okay. thank you. >> commissioner vice president richards. >> just a couple of questions was a full board of appeals. >> we were down one commissioner. >> it would have been a tie. >> yeah. there were a lot of possibilities but they choose 3 to one vote to continue it. >> and penalties au cutting-edge. >> no penalties have not accruing and will not accrue until after a final decision in december. >> okay. thank you. >> good afternoon tim frye here to share a few items in historic preservation commission hearing a fairly short hearing

the day began with the architectural review committee a second living zone and installation across in the art asian museum and temporarily installation the commissioner was supportive of the design prepared by a nonprofit works with high school students and they are developing a design is incorporates a chinese dragon with residential hotel from the asian art museum the second item the adrc provided the comment on revised pedestrian shelter for the brt in front of city hall as you recall the commission asked the mta to review and restudy a more streamlined