affected by the barrage going up and down. people going into. so the owners also have agreed to flip the garage to the upside of the property. so that makes it really good. so even though i still have some questions about the size of the property, of the developments in the backyard, i'm not going to oppose this project. because of that. mainly because the owner seven so agreeable to flipping the garage and moving the light well back to moving the deck back to the light well and it just works better for us all around good sweating the project is really improvement. the façade on the rose street side is going to be nicer with the garage without little shed on the street with a window in it. and so for. not exactly

victorian but i am happy with the project. another point to oppose it. as it is-as it has been modified. now we did sign a settlement agreement >> thank you, ma'am. >> we did sign out last night. i'm okay. >> thank you very much. any other member of the public was to comment on this item? if so, please comport seeing none, hearing none, i will close public comments. have a question for staff. we are proving something different that in the packet. how do we do that? >> sure. i had distributed modified versions of the draft of motion which included a second condition of approval which would allow staff to review and approve any minor modifications at the garage could get initially viewed >> [inaudible] >> we had initially reviewed some options that the owner of the adjacent property as was

the owner, the project sponsor team of when he 88 haight had been discussing. it appeared to be very minor as far as eating in conformance with the secretary of interior standards as was article 10. so those included shifting potential vocational garage door to be modifying the size of the roof deck modify location of the access stairs to the garage from the rear yard. we filled those would be minor as far as having staff approve those at administrative level. so if the commission feels that is an appropriate action that could be argued added to the draft motion and finalize. >> thank you commissioner johnck >> it sounds me with these modifications that it improves the situation there. i guess, the only remaining question i have is emma does that resolve any further issues for the public that we have received?

>> yes., believe so >> okay. in terms of composition in the rear yard. okay. >> am i guess this is mr. sanchez. >> yes., thank you. i just thought i would share with commission some thoughts about the variance. [inaudible] hbc on the variance matter. i think generally the variance is supportive taking an existing condition actually improving it in some ways by enclosing the garage. really appreciate the sponsor and the neighborhood has been responsive and quick to resolve to resolve things. i do have concerns about the resolution that has been reached .. i am very supportive of the changes to the railing that reduce the impacts on the light well. the relocation of the stairs and very supportive and the concern is the relocation of the garage. this laterally sloping lot so changing the garage were moving in on the west side actually raise the height of the building by about

a foot that is one concern but also there is a pattern their lease on the first few trees. pretty consistent spacing between the street trees and this would alter that. their proposal would be to relocate an existing 3g moving up against closer to another existing country in front of neighbors property. i'm not-i have concerns about that. i think it something we can have conversations with public works about by my initial reaction was not to be supportive of that switch with the garage door . i understand the concerns about the past operation of the door. it's unusual in that it's actually a very large garage door that is electrically operated. it's outside, though. so just project of enclosing the grudge is going to attenuate that sound, the noise that comes from the garage open and it's also single-family to only one car it probably won't be used extensively but i would like to have similar conversation with public works about that. i'm supportive of

the stairs and the changes to the railing but have concerns about moving that garage door entry. >> thank you. commissioner pearlman >> thank you. in response, mr. sanchez, to the issue of the height, i notice that the garage is 9 feet. 9 foot clear. so if you flip the garage door to keep the height the same, essentially been a foot ceiling it seems like enough garage 8 foot ceiling is planning so would not raise the roof deck up by four. that was one thing. the other question i have is every project i've ever worked on the closing residential design review to match light wells. wondering why in this case you would have to match the light well? right now there's nothing there, right? there's just offense assessor with the garage door in it >> correct. good the initial response from residential design review is this very low structure. integrate the

concern about matching my welcomes more at the higher levels above the ground level. so i think that's what the residents will design. that was on this. >> don't we also have one stories about the offense anyway essentially? >> yes. it would be pretty low and high. >> i was just curious about why the would not have been matching light well. okay. the other thing-i mean i want to complement the neighbor and the owner for being civil and coming up with a very reasonable solution. first thing i thought about when original letter ms. tischler, was just looked flip it over and begin to solve a problem. so i appreciate when there's a very simple process that people go through to get to a reasonable solution. i appreciate ms. tischler you come today to help endorse that. the only problem i have with the project is that it just feels so ordinary and lackluster. it's not that i

wouldn't approve it but it's just so disappointing the back of this building just looks like could have been built in the 80s as a building that has the form of a san francisco building. the trim is just flat plain. everything is so ordinary. for a building that is when mark-i get it it's a 'this indicates with the back of the building is visible. these are from laguna street and rose you have a case where it's different than midblock where we're yard like we saw in 20th st. and liberty street one with you and the people concede the immediate neighbors. his were the public can see the rear of the building. 198 does have its ornamental scheme that all the way around so from laguna street and from haight street and from rose you see

this historic fabric. so to me is just such a disappointment of its ordinariness. i would advocate that there be something done. create a cornice. that's not really cornices just a parapet. add some depth to the trim, some things to make it feel a little bit more than a builders special which is what that looks like from over here. >> commissioner hyland >> i had not thought about that. i kind of agree. it would not characterize it as a builders special but in context, there might be some more opportunities to impose two incorporates a more victorian trim or some other. anyway that was my comment. i just want to commend the property owner for the reach out to the neighbors. i think

if we had more blocks like this were all the neighbors were ashley and supportive of a project the owner was communicating with them, i think we would have a little fewer disagreements before us. i support the project. >> thank you but i do think we need to remember in terms of design there were looking at whether it's compatible with the historic landmark and so i think i would be reluctant to impose additional designs. he was with her the project is compatible or not we have to make that decision. but we can't as a committee of think we should start designing projects. thank you. commissioner hasz he >> thank you it will click on the design actually appreciative that there's windows now in the back is a look at the neighbor to the west and there's no window punched in there. at least they're matching through the window sizing on the neighbor to the east on the lower units. so it is still a flat back alleyway and those are kind of traditionally flat so i'm fine

with that. the thing on the sound and appreciate the neighbors and the whole thought process of, yes, if you move the door to the appeal again-now we start getting into other problems. as a builder of restaurants and bars, we deal with sound all the time. to be honest with you i guarantee there's probably just simply siding separating these two garage and the building currently and if you simply add a layer of sheet rock, called hat channel was a thin little by the channel and other later she rocked not want to hear anything. so i would probably stick with where the garage or isn't simply make it a requirement that there's double layer of sheet rock in between to mitigate sound. they're not going to hurt anything and even go one bit further and add isolators to the right sure so it doesn't vibrate the structure

. that's easy that just pieces of rubber. with the minor stuff and you're not going to hear anything. that's it. thanks. >> thank you. we have any other comments were a motion? >> i don't we come to an agreement because some of us think we should flip it and others think we should. >> the motion just as we will have stopped work on minor comes with the project is flipped or not is up to the assessment of staff about whether it's appropriate. or possible. so that is our- >> i moved to approve >> second. spirit there's a motion commissioners to approve this matter with conditions as been amended by staff. on a motion hasz he aye johnck. johns got matsuda aye pearlman aye hyland aye wolfram aye. so

moved commissioners that motion passes unanimously 7-0. sony administrator was save you >>" i and take the matter under advisement at this point and ask the project sponsor to look at some of the suggestions that commissioner hasz he had. so the ways of addressing the sound issues and keeping the door in its current location make any other changes noted would be preferred alternative and member of the public ms. tischler and also suggest you stay in contact with staff in any session would go through the board of appeals within 10 days after the variance letter. thank you. >> commissioners the places us on item 10-8-b >> i think we'll take a short break right now. we will reconvene at 3 pm. >> 411 brannan st. and 2017

3515 california st. these are both legacy business applications. >> good afternoon commissioner. stephanie cisneros department staff. the artist before you today to legacy business nominations and application sure cemented to the planning department on january 3 and are ready for your recommendation. all applications were previously reviewed by the office of small business for completion prior to transmittal to the planning department. your commission packets contain a draft resolution for each business outlining physical features and traditions associated with the success of the business. the first application before you today is for art-house gallery a contemporary fine art gallery located in the south of market mission bay neighborhood. founded in 1996 art-house gallery began an appointment only gallery operating out of a

knob hill apartment. without any outside backing and through its exposure media interest in community engagement and involvement, the gathering has become a successful and well-known and well loved art gallery in san francisco. it has become an important business within the soma mission bay neighborhood and our community showcasing an array of corrections by local artists and giving back to the community that is been welcoming of it since it moved to its current location in 2005. although the business is less than 30 years old that risk of being misplaced and would benefit greatly from the designation is a legacy business. the second application is for a local independent bookstore with three san francisco locations. one on van ness ave., chestnut street and california street. the bookstore has been in operation in san francisco

under various names and owners since 1857 was not incorporated as 16th until 1946. since incorporation the business has proven itself to be an integral part of san francisco history through its focus on providing for the needs and wants of the neighborhood through its various neighborhoods through its workshops storytimes and products. you information is come to light regarding the significant role of book inc. since 1857 not only in local history but also a national literary history as well. having a strong connection with authors such as mark twain and bret hart, and playing a strong will as a publisher. i have a few copies of this information to share with you today. this information will be officially entered into the record for this business and will be included in the application materials prior to its hearing before the small business commission. after review these

applications staff finds that both art-house gallery and book inc. that the criteria qualify for listing on the legacy business registry. this concludes my presentation good i'm happy to answer any questions you may have. thank you. >> thank you. do we have any questions for staff? no. so at this time we will take public comment on this item were sponsors of the legacy business was to come forward, please, do so and you off 3 min. any member of the public wish to speak? i guess seeing none, we will close public comments. think back to the commission. commissioners, comments or questions? commissioner matsuda >> these are great business. i'm very supportive of it. [inaudible] >> thank you. commissioner johns >> i think they're great business. i do support them in a more familiar with books, inc. than i am with the other

one so just leave my-make some comments about book , inc. before books in, it's regrettable that none of this is in the documentation. it was owned by theodore [inaudible] who lived from 1893 until 1972. he was the proprietor of the predecessor which with leon [inaudible] the bookshop which was opened in 1924 and was then sold to lou langenfeld who reinvent books, inc. in 1946. now gerber lilienthal also operated the lantern press which published poet tree and other art books and the lantern press additions were printed by the rap wordpress, and that for

those of you who are interested in fine press, will recognize that name. in 1937 lilienthal and eve van antwerp voted quercus press as a sort of hobby then venture and that in turn led to vendor hot press, which purchased a washington hand press and in hourly and impress once owned by the great english men william morrison the presses now in the huntington library. among the things that-press published from 37-48 were pamphlets by christopher morley, sherwood anderson, [inaudible] and a notable publication of poems by robinson jeffers. the name lilienthal is perhaps familiar to some people as in the cause lilienthal house. [inaudible]

max lilienthal was part of a huge and enormously important network of families in san francisco. in california which included the centers of mercantile legal and financial establishments. that is wells fargo bank. the families known as the max, the schlosser's, the passengers, the lilienthal's, the green walls, the green bombs, commercials, [inaudible] sims, that was in jb copy, the [inaudible] the steinhardt, the wind stocks, walters, the fox the earnings as wills [inaudible] and many others. max blumenthal. sophie durst oh. this-she and her husband were interested in books but her father had operated the first pony express station in sacramento. he founded the alaska commercial

company and for those of you who will don't remember, the united states government gave the alaska commercial company the exclusive right to harvest herds in alaska for 20 years on the condition that company establish towns, schools, churches, hospitals, and generally develop the community of alaska. in other words, it was absolutely huge and the remnants of the alaska commercial building such as were preserved, are still in what is known as the union bank building on the north east corner of california and samson. there could be volumes written about theodore lilienthal and his contribution and it's his wife's contribution to publishing. there is so much that could have been said and i think should have been included

in the historical part of this business because it made-i was so disappointed because >> did you not see this part that has a prehistoric documents in the back we >> i certainly did not. >> that was part of the package at this long histories about books inc. there's a narrative and letters from- >>[cross-talking] [off mic] >> i retract any criticism. >>[laughing] >> you definitely submit supplemented it would have provided us quite a lot of information here. >> anyway i support it. >>[laughing] >> thank you. any other comments? yes mr. hyland >> i supported as were. i love books inc. stores and unfortunately lost one in my neighborhood but i'm glad they

are surviving. i support it. >> thank you. do we have a recommendation to- >> i recommend we approve. both of them. >> second. >> that was a motion? thank you commissioners. on a motion to adopt recommendations for approval for both properties commissioner hasz aye johnck that johns got matsuda aye pearlman aye hyland. wolfram aye. so moved the motion passes unanimously 7-0. commissioners the places on your final item for today's hearing could item 11 this is a pier 70 mixed-use district part. the draft incremental impact report for the project could be please note this public hearing his intent to assist the commission in its panic commission its preparation - excuse me -

historic preservation preparation of the comment on the draft eir. cummins made by the members of the public at this hearing will not be considered cummins on the dockyard. may not be responded to in the final eir. the planning commission will hold a public hearing to receive comments on the draft eir in beef every night 2017. written comments on the draft eir will be accepted at the planning department until 5 pm on february 21, 2017. >> good afternoon president wolfram members of the commission and i'm only that you plan department staff and er coordinator of the pier 70 mixed-use district project. joining me today on my colleagues are rick cooper senior and our mental planner, which to plate his word preservation technical specialist and tina hamm senior preservation plan. also with us today is the project sponsor team which includes the port of

san francisco and forest said the item before you is review and comment on the pier 70 mixed-use district project draft environmental impact report were draft eir in accordance with san francisco's local procedures for implement in the california environment so quality act were ceqa. the commission members e-mailed a link to the draft eir at the start of the public review period which began on december 22, 2016 and will continue until february 21, 2017. today we are here to provide an opportunity for the commission to discuss historic resource issues pertaining to this project and formulate any comments you may wish to submit to the environment so review officer on the draft eir. i would like to introduce project sponsor, kelly present them with forest city provide you a brief overview of the project.

>> thank you melinda and good afternoon president wolfram and members of the commission at my name is kelly presser and him wednesday forced city's one to go project sponsors of the pier 70 mixed-use district project is america we give you an informational presentation on november 16 on the project concluded project background and overview. will we state the information that was conveyed during that presentation. as a general we might've, the proposed project would rehabilitate and redevelop a portion of the pier 70 new market rate and affordable residential uses commercial office, retail light industrial art uses, parking infrastructure to bowman as well as new street improvements and public open space. as you can see on my first slide, the majority of the project site which is indicated here in blue, yellow and orange, is located within the union iron works historic district which is listed on the national registry of historic place. in recognition of pier 70's role in development of building industrial architecture both between 1884 and the end of world war ii. with implementation of the proposed project buildings two, 12 and

21 indicate on the map in yellow would be the located in the compliance with the secretary of the interior standards for the treatment of historic properties and adapted for use. the existing remnants of irish hill also contribute features to the district would be mostly retained. seven contribute instructors and sheds indicated in light gray on the diagram on the screen, containing 92,000 square feet would be demolished. subways 5-8 currently covered by asphalt would be partially the most. as part of the historic core project the approximate 31,000 ft.2 into the building, 117, located on the project site would also be removed and a growing environment or view as part of the historic core project. taking a step back to

look at the entire district, you can see the scale proposed rebuild patient across the site. as a reminder, the mixed-use district project is approximate 35 acres in total. the majority of which is within the historic district. the historic district itself was approximate 66 acres in total. the proposed project is eight in compliance with the 2010 master plan which this body provided significant comment on when it was before it for review and was ultimately endorsed by the port commission. page from the plan is shown on your screen now. then taking another look out to the district converting a plan into a simplified diagram of usage, you can see across the distorted district the new construction is focused primarily on the pier 70 mixed-use district project site which is on the southern edge of the historic district the reader of the site dedicated to open space industrial maritime uses an historic rehabilitation. i would like to

take the last few minutes just to remind you of some of the design guidelines and standards in place to guide any new construction that is to be built within the historic district understood as a reminder, we've taken to get approaches when looking at new construction, how that should be regulated at the site. all this is included in the project design for development document. the two approaches are those that are project wide standards being sinners every building this site would have to adhere to and the location specific standards, where we see a need for a heightened amount of sensitivity given proximity to certain important resource. starting with the project wide standards, built into those are the some of the key character defining features of the district. notably, the building variety. if you been to pier 70 unit with a mixture of the turtles heights textures with lines and wanted to make sure that new construction at

the site adheres to that as well. an example that is a standard every building else within the mixed-use district site would have to differ from its neighbor in at least two of the specific range of categories. we have also spent a lot of time on the natural palette across the entire site. specifying were certain materials would be allowed were specifically disallowed given some sensitivity to the historic district or for example, building 113 is an incredible brick building having a new construction brick building directly adjacent seems inappropriate and doesn't add to that sense of variety are what defines the district. so that would specifically be prohibited. another example is probation in any building that fully finished with stucco. then moving to the location specific standards, what we have done here in partnership with the port preservation

planning step as was the planning department, is focused on certain façades particularly sensitive and particularly impactful given their adjacency to existing resources that will be via built-in. you can see this particular façades called out here that there are certain requirements depending on the sensitivity of the resource in the proposed buildings. for example, certain buildings are required to have a volumetric reference to an adjacent neighbor. other buildings are required to have a relational treatment or have a treatment that provides reference to the character defining features of the district and that adjacent resource. what i am showing on the screen your are selections from the design for development document. for that concludes my presentation i will hand back up to melinda >> thank you peered >> thank you, kelly. the draft eir concluded that the proposed project as relates to the demolition of district buildings 11, 15, 16, 19, 25,

32, and 66, the relocation of building 21, district contributor and individually significant. the site grading and the alteration of irish hill at district budgeting feature result in less than significant impact peered to historical resources. improving measures having proposed requiring documentation of the contributing things proposed for demolition and public interpretation of the site's history. the draft eir concluded proposed project as relates to the rehabilitation of buildings two, 12, and 21, district contributors building 21 being individually significant my and new infill

construction would result in a significant impact to the union iron works historic district. the mitigation measure requiring the preparation of a storage resource evaluation report review of an establishment of performance criteria are the rehabilitation of buildings two, 12, and 21 and a mitigation measure establishing performance criteria and review process for new construction would reduce these impacts to a less than significant level. i would like to induce which hsu great historic preservation and technical specialists walk through the cultural resources section of the draft eir. >> hello commissioners. as melinda mentioned the pier 70 yard concluded to be [inaudible] pier 70 historic visit could be mitigated whom mitigation program. i'll spend this time to go through the department's approach and review of the

mitigation measures is applied to the historic architectural resort that when we assess impact within historic district supplanted carmen to examine several factors including an element or two like the size and significance of a historic district, the number and location of contribute and on contributing features, the district's integrity: district boundaries on the project. assessments within districts typically take on a case-by-case basis due to the variety of the district and the unique nature of historical resources. the project analysis was conducted in a manner with an acknowledgment that demolition of certain judy resources would occur while it would also provide a strong framework for the new construction. the project is not demolish any buildings which is deemed to be individually eligible for the california were national register. all the project is the most intriguing resources the national register district still retains its integrity and its eligibility for the national register. as kelly mentioned, the port of san francisco master plan anticipated the demolition and so that was factored into a knowledge of the designation of the actual district for the national register. as also kelly mentioned, there is a design for deponent document

which is a focused plan that basically outlines a set of goals the project has to follow. it's kind of like a turning code within a planning code. specific to the project and for lack of a better word. so for the new construction the design for element doctrine establishes standards for jason sees to historic building. specifically the project and great setbacks and nesting standards is also important view court orders, height reference, the side treatment slick including height, vertical modulation, proportional horizontal banding and material grain. also puts a strict limitation on façade materials. through the incorporation of the standards and new construction is required to be compatible it differentiate with the historic resource within the district or to further ensure new construction is not impacted district the dir contains a mitigation measure outlining

performance criteria. these performance criteria*bush a set of standards for the new construction that must be followed as well as certain building specific standards of how the material and a final review process for any new construction within the disk. for the rehab of the historic resources, the dir establishes mitigation measure for historic resource evaluation at the port as was another set of performance criteria specific to the rehabilitation of the three buildings, balloons, two, 12 and 21 which would guarantee consistency and compatibility with the district finally for the demo of the contributing resources the mitigation measure we do include our kind of standard documentation measure which is typical as well as public interpretation programs for basically document and either resources that will be taken out on the sitewide-based and i'm happy to provide any other details if you have any questions great alternate presentation back over to melinda. >> thank you. >> thank you, rich. before i

conclude, but to remind everyone that the public hearing on the draft eir for the planning commission is scheduled for february 9. in order to be responded to in the final eir comments on the draft eir must be submitted orally at the planning commission hearing or in writing to the planning department's environmental review officer by 5 pm on february 21, 2017. the public comments at this hpc hearing to assist the hbc in formulating comment on the draft eir the public commons heard to date will not be responded to the final eir. after the planning commission hearing and close of the public on and review period the planet abominable prepare and publish a comments and responses document which will contain our responses to all relevant comment on the draft eir. this ends my presentation and staff is available to answer any questions you may have. thank you. >> thank you. commissioners, any questions for the sponsor or staff? commissioner johnck >> i have some comments. i can

wait. with the public on >> at this time will take public comment on this item. does any member of the public wish to speak on this matter? if so these come for. seeing none, hearing none, we will close public comment. commissioner johnck >> i think this is been up quite a challenge for the project developer the port and the city food last was the proposed demolition of contributing buildings and noncontributing and the historic district. but what i want to say is that i think it done a great job in providing a rationalization. whatever is interested in what was really helpful to me was the report, the analysis, that carrie and company did, that showed how the

demolition would not be severely impactful as long as there were duplicate structures. some of the structures were even not quite buildings and i thought it was quite a good criteria an additional layer of criteria that they came up with two rationalize the demolition. so i would just say that i recommend that we agree with that. in terms of the final decision, less than significant impact, however with mitigation. and where i would speak about mitigation, i was interested in irish hill and being a teacher and instructor cultural landscapes at the university here, i was

wondering if there had been a cultural landscape report or analysis done of irish hill? i would ask because i'll be interested in that. as well as -i think the historic resources-that is number one. the second point i would ask about is in the historic resource evaluation with that include an evaluation of the circulation? so the circulation of activity and development among the three errors. so, if we can agree that there is substantial representation of non-demolition that represents the three eras, the first ever been 1885-1900, second error

being up to world war ii and for error being post-world war ii, so i can agree that there is substantial representation of those eras tickly with the arrow one being the historic court and building 113 for example. but would i be interested in either ensuring that the mitigation incorporated is [inaudible] interpretation how the evolution occurred among the three eras in -changing functioning of activity at the shipyard. so my two points are, cultural landscape on irish ale in the second, wanting to ensure that either historic resource evaluation that there is a way of documenting this circulation shipyard evolution. >> thank you mr. sucre to have a response to commissioner

johnck squashing? >> sure. as part of the technical analysis we did conduct in evaluation by rochelle is a cultural landscape that is part of the background study that are basically factored into the report. >> i do not see that in the package at >> it might not have been in the pack but it's in appendix basically within the reports. so we are happy to send it forward to you. >> yes. i think was part of the link. there's quite a few widows. >> okay. >> i think in terms of the wayfinding and integration the hpc once brought a comment to focus the public interpretation or insurer the era and the time frames of the sites evolution is discussed in the public interpretation from good i think that's entirely appropriate. >> thank you. either and their comments commissioners on the adequacy? to refine the eir to be adequate the mitigation to be appropriate finance? that's

what we are here for good i'm seeing a lot of nodding heads. commissioner pearlman >> i have a number of comments. i think the wayfinding common is an interesting one relative to the layout of this area. this imposition of a grid over a place that was never greeted because of the movement of materials. there's a lot of history about the movement, that the building were designed specifically around how they were building ships. so they do not build ships in shipyards that had a street grid, a city street grid laid over them, and so to me, that piece of the design of this whole thing feels a little forced and artificial. but that leaves me-release me to a second point about a number of the design

standards of how the how do the new buildings respect the historic resources? how are they implemented? there were some comments about the new buildings would be set back for use. so my comment is, how does the grid provide setbacks for the use? because it ratings are all buildings are all lined up. i think it's pretty evident, page 4-d-77 i think the new 21st st. but it shows the new buildings block in which completely blocked the view of the historic core on the other side of the site and completely blocks the view of irish oh. so, to me, this is a diagram of not respecting the historic buildings. so i don't think that there's an adequate-i mean the same thing is true of the 22nd st. corridor with the new building

is completely block the view of building 12 and building two. so i think there's some problems there. in terms of the weather the mitigation measures respond to the demolition, i completely disagree with the analysis that was done. i have been there many many times. i've gone there to photograph. i didn't at pier 70 quite want to run up quite frequently and even the text of the discussion about the demolition says things like because building 15, 16, 25 and purdue are experienced as one structure they were examined collectively within the building complex. rather than individually to determine the impact of demolition on the integrity of the united ironworks historic gesture. there is so much discussion in the historic analysis the hre, about all these buildings that are attached to building 12. how they are integral, they are spatially integral. it is the

description of how the materials moved in the building of all those buildings, why they were placed where they were and if you are inside building 12, and you look over your shoulder with those big masses-the biggest forms of the adjacent buildings that now will be torn down, are now visible. they are now all open and you see these fairly sizable buildings all interconnected. so then, india analysis, i mean i pointed out pictures just from the street. they're very interesting forms that it seems to me could be used for big boxy forms that could easily be rehabilitated for usable space that would send-i mean, this one from the end of you which is from the south looking north essentially,

shows the distinctive character of all those buildings combined which will completely go away because now you have a blank-you will have a wall on the south end of building 12, which according to the documentation,-and this kind of surprised me-the design of new construction would respond to stuart adjacent buildings-- i'm sorry - there was one, building 12 the not historically have a south facing façade. therefore we rehabilitation will by necessity conduct a new south elevation while. without south elevation wall is specifically in the place where it is open. it's [inaudible] so that completely changes the character of building 12. and the complex. so it seems to me that by demoing all those attached buildings the project does material alter what seems to be pretty adverse manner the physical characteristics of the district. so, and we are losing seven of the 10 buildings on the site. so that seems fairly

substantial and seven on the other. so essentially losing 32% of the buildings in their seems like a high amount if those-those are contributing buildings. you know, if they're not contributed goes and i get it. that makes sense they can come down but it seems to me all the buildings that were -that are of the complex of building 12 which is discussed quite in detail, by losing all of the attached buildings were losing the story of the shipbuilding, howdy materials were moved through the building. you are losing an enormous amount of space. i get it. i know it's not an expensive for the city to we have all these buildings, but also, you then imply the street grid which this clearly wouldn't about a street grid because that's all quite irregular. footprints are quite irregular there. so i think

you are eviscerating a significant amount of the history by suggesting that this is okay to do this. the mitigation measure of some maps and some text and some photographs to me don't rise to the level of mitigating what i think is a substantial loss to the district. i don't know why you couldn't have streets that are not straight. right now there's 22nd st. comes down and curzon goes down. you know certainly new buildings can be adapted to sites that are not rectangular-limited bully 21 is been moved to a location and surrounded by buildings. right now you can see building 21 on three sides fairly open. so to me there are a lot of questions about whether the analysis in the mitigation measures

responded to what i believe is an adverse impact on the district. thank you. >> thank you. other comments? it sounds like you believe the eir does not adequately address the mitigation? he impacts are being greater than described? >> exact. such a funny thing. the mitigation measures don't rise to a level to diminish the significant impacts. in my opinion. i don't know if-i don't know what mitigation would because it seems to me that this is a significant impact. spears mr. hsu great could you remind us, right now the finding is the removal of these buildings is not a significant impact. [inaudible] annotator requires litigation

>> well, is less than [inaudible] mitigation. basically the mitigation what helps to reduce the impact >> so it is a significant mitigation. >> right. yes. so when this in this instance when we are doing the analysis, we look at the totality could since it is a district, the district is the historic resource in this instance per howell ceqa defined as opposed to the kind of individual components. so part of what when he analysis was conducted, it was to look at what could be removed that doesn't severely impact the history of the overall totality of the property still retaining those important aspects which is where the caring memo came into play to help find that point for accommodating new construction will also having to basically keep the important pieces of the district. so

there was a kind of rotation and within a historic district you can have resources that are defined as more imports or more crucial to the district and ones that are a better more insularity. then with regard to the street grid, we do have some good patterns over the site history that there was a logic to how the site was organized. at the height of when it was an active ship building yard, there was a defined pattern of movement through the site. it might not necessarily have been a strict grid, but some of the other factors that came into play was how to be a line the new site so basically the city's existing street pattern basically reconnect those components so somewhat our city undertook was to help find a way to reconnect to the city

will also still, waiting for something that was referential to the site's existing history which historic aerials and other things help to inform us integrally with the street patterns. >> so was 20 for street ever there? because our show was that it was 21st reader? >> yes. it was there. >> okay. i just want to comment on what you're talking up the totality of its history. adjusting to demolition of all the buildings attached to building 12 diminishes the history of the site. so therefore i just don't agree that can be mitigated to be less than significant. because the description of the shipbuilding process and the movement of materials had to have those other buildings to make that happen. so building 12 alone does not convey the history of the site. so i would just like that as a comment to be in there. >> how are we doing-since we

usually have not had disagreements in our eir comment letters we took we have not voted on it how does the commission then deal with the different opinions >> commissioners, is how you will want to draft a letter in the past amount while you're right it's not frequent if one commissioner felt strongly that, judy included we would separate that comment in the letter. but that is at your discretion to decide whether or not to do that. >> that make sense. >> ivanova animals agrees with me. >> i don't. i agree that removing those buildings does diminish somewhat the historic character of the southern part but i think they're very subsidiary [inaudible] i don't believe that it has a significant impact to the district as a whole. i believe that was in the eir is appropriate. other commissioners have other points?

>> as a whole different thing than looking at the actual building and the scale of the boundary me, 25 as think as a bathroom. if 25 when a way that would be fine but the scale of the gabled building that are parallel and perpendicular to the building 12 are quite substantial. they're not small buildings. i think would significantly alter both the just story of the history as well as the district because that would be a completely different piece. that would be there than what represents the history. >> commissioners, just as a point of clarification for our notes, aside from the demolition about commissioner pearlman made some comments regarding the vistas or the visibility of the buildings. while this was a working waterfront it was quite congested with a lot of activity. so i think that the

expenses of open space in the vistas seen today may not necessarily have been the case during its period of significance, but what i am suggesting is a matter of clarification if the commission that has not been adequately detailed were outlined within the eir we could someday provide more information and more documentation on sort of what was the strains of being on the ground at the time of the period of significance and really what was the vistas or those you corridor. >> the one thing i would disagree with you on is that slips 528 would have an open. visually (they would not have a dense pack of buildings which is what's now being proposed for the area slips five-agent i'm not objecting to adding buildings but i suspect that when you look at a lot of pictures, i think you are some

pictures from the last presentation of the 18,000 people worked there he saw that ceo people but the buildings were quite far apart. there was a lot of the area could do was load. around the main building. it's only do not have-this is creating a grade that is really a dense package is like a downtown urban core. around that sven surrounds the historic buildings. so i disagree. yes, i would like to know more about that as a way to understand the proposed design relative to the historic building. >> well, >> commissioner johnck >> i can endorse adding that if others agree the group comments but i also recommend is a minority opinion should be put in the letter. i think your

comments-i think it should be recognized. minority, however you want to do that. >> so is it there just to i apologize, commissioner. is it there to recap that i guess we could represent a letter that states the majority of the hbc find the document to be adequate and accurate and agrees with the conclusions and then base way to go on and make a statement about the public interpretation in making sure that the interposition program includes a discussion of the various eras >> there is errors also the movement of the site. circulation and he was the circulation to the site. the second comment i would have been here would be is one commissioner expressed disagreement with the document particularly with regard to the findings for the demolition of the intervening buildings and

the mitigation measures or improvement measures that were cited into the eir, and then >> it sounds like commissioner stated that the event with the mitigation the demolition is still significant. significant impact on the- >> okay. then the final comments would be is to provide additional information on the site planning as well as the view corridor that from the times basically over the site's history is to basically provide additional information within a document with regard to the site planning street grid and you corridor. >> does the design for development mentioned is that include a section on view corridor or vistas? >> yes. >> so there it is in their >> yes. there is something in the. >> commissioner hyland >> on time to formulate a thought but i think the issue is whether the impacts of the

demolition to the district can be mitigated to less than significant. i think that is what i assume you're struggling with. i've always struggled with demolishing multiple buildings and then creating mitigation that would lessen the impact to lessen the significance. however on this proxy i think the project sponsor has been extremely thorough and has greater advisors and myself certainly and how to lessen the impacts and mitigate them. i think it's a good project. i think there's a lot of variety is being brought back. so- >> i think it is the how does one conclude that the mitigation impact seven mitigated to less than significant. i think that

is the challenge and i would support the experts have offered the-just >> some more information. for ceqa the determination porn impact is whether or not it maturely impairs the 02 voting of a resource. at the end of the day is it still qualify for whatever historical designation that it has. so with regard to the project and the demo in the new construction, the staff and family historic district to be a bible is worth district that is still maintains its own stability for the national register. >> can i ask that you make that judgment? because it seems to me if you completely in this rate the ship building process that was present there, how do you make a judgment that is not significant? in a

shipbuilding district? >> it is fair. i think it's difficult to look at the site when you're only looking at the forest city portion of the site. one of the key things that historic district has-it's a pretty vast historic district in terms of size and in terms of complexity. so when you look at how the shipbuilding operations happens, there was a lot of movement between the pieces and parts that there were also a lot of buildings that were commonly built a mentor down and built and then torn down. so like we have currently was the kind of remainders of those buildings that were there but like when we look at the site compared to 1940s and 1950s sister, you saw a much more robust landscape that included a lot of these different structures and buildings and things. some of which are still there and some of which are not. when you do dissect down to it the history of the building was, we're

whether or operations, is enough of these eras of history still being representative and like if i came across the site today could you still understand the district significance doesn't still meet the criteria that the national register would put forward for it. thank you. >> yes. it's looking at including the bae and crinkle park and the whole site. is this whole totality. okay. any other comments from commissioners? esther hsu quite given up information to the letter from a squeak i think is our final item right? any further, squeaked we did take public comment, right? >>[oath repeated] you" already >> any other items we will close the hearing. thank you. >>[gavel] >>[adjournment] >> >> >>

>> good morning. come on, you guys can do better than that. we are in san francisco. good morning. look at this incredible space we are in. just kidding hands for shame is that everyone. >>[applause] >> who brought this great state back to life. first off, i really want to thank all of the elected officials and department heads and community who are joining us. for me,

with these turbulent times ahead, i tend to reflect. as someone who has worked on market street for over 15 years heads an organization that is owned property at six and market since 1990, and for the past four years has offices across the street on jones, i know firsthand how much the market has changed. as the leader of community housing partnership, i have seen how mayor ed lee has committed himself personally to transforming midmarket. we have development booming,, locally serving small businesses dotting our streets and the tenderloin has benefited, too. with more investment on taylor and 11th worth corridor. our residents at six and market feels safer, enjoy their

thriving neighborhood and are proud to be part of the diverse fabric of midmarket. but we are not done. by no means have we past the finish line. we still have a lot of hard work to do to continue this transformation of market street into the boulevard that chp residents know it can be. to benefit the long standing community, the new technology sector, and all of san francisco. mayor ed lee will tackle is citywide priorities, homelessness, affordable housing, police reform, neighborhood stabilization, and defending our san francisco values with the same determination tenacity, and vision as he did midmarket. you know he always likes a challenge. he will protect our immigrants. he will ensure our healthcare continues and he will keep our cities

vibrancy alive. we have a long way to go until we live up to our highest ideals for our city. in terms of how we work and 2m homelessness, create more affordable housing, and making san francisco a city we all can be proud of. whether you are a third-generation, a middle income family wanting to stay in the city, were a newly arriving immigrants. i, like all of you, i'm looking forward to being part of that powerful change that will work together and collectively to create a more equitable see fran and to defend our values against all of those who do not support them or believe in them. it is now my honor to introduce mayor edwin lee. >>[applause]

>>[cheerring] >>[applause] >> thank you, gail. thank you. thank you very much. thank you. thank you. >>[applause] >> thank you. good morning. good morning board president london pating, our supervisors thank you for being here, our elected officials, our city staff. our fellow san franciscans. now more than ever i am grateful to be a san franciscans. in a city where we honor and love one another and stand up for each other. every year we gather to reflect on

accomplishments of the year past and to set ambitious goals for the year ahead. but this year is different. because our city's success stands against a backdrop of a vastly different america. the election last year and the follow that continues has shaken our understanding of our country. while i am here with you today to say, i am confident that san franciscans will lead the way for the entire nation. >>[applause] >> since november 8 our cities compassion, our heart, has been tested. people say that we live

in our own world here in california and san francisco. well, this i have to say is just an alternative fact. >>[laughing] >> let me tell you about our america. our city. in our america, people are equal. no matter what race, religion, gender or sexual orientation. in our america we embrace our differences and understand that they make us stronger and more vibrant. we are a sanctuary city now, tomorrow, forever. >>[applause] >> >>[cheerring] >>[applause]

>> and we refuse, we refuse, to accept the status quo is the best we can do. we don't wish for affordable housing, we build it. we don't complain about health access, we provide it. and we don't talk about protecting immigrants, we stand shoulder to shoulder with them. you know, the latest historian and san francisco made up kevin starr said that our state is the prism through which america sees its future. the republicans talk about american carnage. i say, come see san francisco. come experience our celebration of our diversity and our economic success. come see what the future of america looks like.

>>[applause] >> now, it is time to fight back. guarantee that the progress we have gained in previous decades are not erased . to protect hard-fought victories for civil rights, women's rights, disabled rights, gay rights. and the equality that her predecessors battled and bled for. and to continue the progress on the challenges we face in our city, homelessness, housing, quality of life, and police reform. look how far we have come already. when i took office unemployment was near 10%. our budget deficit reached well over half $1 billion. our pension and healthcare costs were unsustainable. fast

forward to today and more than 140,000 people are working compared to 2010. unemployment, we just learned, this week, just dropped to 2.95%. >>[applause] >> and market street, where we are today, had the highest vacancy rates in the city and housing sites sat undeveloped. today, we stand in the beautiful hibernia bank building celebrating a resurgence of san francisco's grand boulevard. dozens of new businesses arts organizations and large employers have brought new life to market street and the tenderloin. in

this area, more than 2000 units of housing have been built in the past few years with more than 20% affordable. and every day we make progress towards a safer and a more vibrant market street. we certainly have not crossed the finish line but look how far we have come. when i took office san francisco was experiencing a housing crisis. longtime san franciscans were struggling to afford homes due to the failure to build housing through the 90s and 2000 and a surge in economic growth that put upward pressure on housing prices. so we went to work. reinvesting in affordable housing at all levels from public housing to low income and middle class housing. we acted fast. in 2012 we secured a 1.3 billion-dollar housing trust fund and in 2015 a2 and

intended billion-dollar affordable housing bond to build the housing our residents need. we pledged to create 30,000 new and rehabilitated housing units half, half of which would be affordable to low income and middle class families. and, we announced an unprecedented new program to completely rehabilitate our public housing stock. well, today i'm proud to say we are on track and 13,813 units closer to meeting our goal of 30,000. >>[applause] >> these new units will save so many families from displacement and of this new housing, 42% is affordable to low income and middle class san

franciscans. >>[applause] >> i am especially proud that in october we begin the second phase of two phases to rebuild and relocate public housing. as a child who grew up in public housing, this is personal to me. 11,000 low income people will now living new and refurbished homes after decades of living in neglected property housing. and when the federal government failed us, i chose not to make excuses. we called together decision-makers, both locally and in the obama administration, to find an innovative solution and today thousands of our city's most low income families have beautiful new homes where they can deepen their roots and their children can blossom.

>>[applause] >> we are now a national model for how other cities can improve public housing. years ago this was just a dream. today, it is a total transformation and to supervisors melia cohen and pres. breed and every person in a department who worked hand in hand on this effort, i say, thank you. >>[applause] >> this is a true testament to what we can accomplish when we unite around the values push toward a common goal. we need to make these moments possible for more and more residents. people across the city are struggling to afford rent. homeownership feels completely

unattainable. together we have a responsibility to take care of every working family struggling to keep their heads above water and a foothold in our city because a strong middle class is a strong city. >>[applause] >> well, some of the most in capital ideas to build middle-class housing having met with strong opposition in years past and i hear the deserts and i commit to working through them because we have no other option. we must work harder to find common ground and focus on programs that we know will make the biggest difference is for our families. together we can

incentivize the construction of new homes dedicated to middle-class families and create certainty within the process of building new housing. we already have some programs that work well. our small sites program, for example, where the city purchases and permanently preserves land controlled units has kept struggling families in the city. well, rené grannis who an artist who lives in the mission, was facing else at either the eviction and because of the small sites program he will longer worries. thank you renée, for being here. >>[applause] >> i am excited to announce that we will grow this program and in the next three years we will give 240 more household like renée's a chance to remain in san francisco. >>[applause] >> and to help middle-class

families buy homes we will extend the down payment assistance loan program. it will bridge it earlier and her family were able to buy a home in the sunset when the down payment robot was removed for them to renée, thank you for being here today. >>[applause] wi >> bridget, sorry. we are building another 20,000 units along the bayfront, the southern bayfront. a third of which will be affordable including as much middle-class housing as possible. we all this production is having an impact and we are starting to see friends stabilize, even as they continue to surge elsewhere in california. the evidence is in. building more housing does help more people afford san francisco. >>[applause]

>> and as we accelerate the building of more housing for our nurses, teachers, first responders, we cannot lose sight of our responsibility to care for our most vulnerable population. our homeless. until last summer our city did not have a streamlined approach to homelessness. different city departments, each owned a part of the solution and despite their best efforts, the current system was not working. well, now, five months later the department of homelessness and supportive housing has helped thousands find safer healthier lives. since i took office my administration has helped 9 789 people out of homelessness. >>[applause] >> tonight we will be

conducting our biannual homeless count when we are reminded that even as we resolve homelessness for thousands, there is a need to serve thousands more. we will not solve homelessness with a cookie-cutter approach like the programs of the past. our new and to end navigation system built on the concept of navigation centers that i initiated in 2014 provides the individual support and resources to help the person off the street and into a situation best suited for their needs. a shelter. a navigation center. housing or back to a home with love once. we know that very few solutions are one size fits all. to successfully intervene, we need to understand the root cause of

and individuals homelessness whether it be economic behavioral, medical. the navigation system allows the flexibility to do that by working with each individual to meet with they are. then we connect them directly to services, to treat the root causes of their homelessness. next month we will open the third navigation center, thanks to the dogpatch community and supervisor cohen would've welcomed this with compassion and empathy. i am pleased many districts and supervisors are stepping it up to welcome homeless service sites in areas all across the city. we know the navigation center model is working and in the past two years it has helped more than 1100 people off the streets just like terry quinn, who is here with us today could thank you for being here, terry.

>>[applause] >> to help thousands of more people just like terry today i'm pleased to announce the fourth and fifth navigation centers. hummingbird place and the south of market navigation center. >>[applause] >> the fourth center, the hummingbird place, will be on the campus of zuckerberg san francisco general hospital and will exclusively serve people with mental health and addiction challenges. the fifth- >>[applause] >> the fifth center, the soma navigation center will be a triage resource it halfway off the streets for long-term people , homeless, and people leaving contaminants. thank you,

google, for your generous support for this. >>[applause] >> you know, expanding navigation centers is not our only step. we are also creating, mentally new pathways to move 320 formerly homeless people into stable housing through a partnership with housing authority. placements begin next month and by moving people up the housing ladder we create space in permanent supportive housing. we also have a population of people who time and time again have cycled through our system. picked up by the police. taken to the emergency room. held for a few days and released by back on our streets. these patients have nearly 4 visits per year

to the psych emergency ward. well, this is not solving the issue ladies and gentlemen, but he does not address the root causes. it is our moral responsibility to do better and we will do better. people like tahani who is here today and her family who struggled with her mental ill-mentally ill brother for years worried about him day and night.. well to laura's law program tahani's brother is getting out he needs to stay safe and recover and in this case the program literally saved a life. thank you tahani for being here. >>[applause] >> tahani's story proves laura's law works. so i say thank you supervisor mark farrell and the board for adopting its. >>[applause] >> we have now more than 100

families that we have helped since it began. well, now let us help hundreds of more people like tahani's brother. we must improve our considerate -conservatorship program. it is time to put the people first to treat underlying mental health challenges. the cycling has to stop. i commit to putting the resources forward to provide people the intensive care they need and i hope the courts will match our commitment. this can't happen with our justice partners. our health department and all the courts, all working together on behalf of the patient. we know these collaborative courts work such as the behavioral health course and the drug courts which have been so successful. and we

have to apply the same ingenuity and compassion to conservative ships with a 360° health assessment, better coordinating our health and legal systems. you know, decisions about treatment should include an individual's complete medical record and we want people on the most successful and least restrictive past to recovery. i will forward a proposal to the courts to implement this partnership and i just abate spirited discussion in the weeks to come. as we improve our compassionate assistance for the mentally ill and drug dependent, we must also look at the impacts as having on our neighborhoods. we will meet this problem at its source, on the streets are city. and start-we'll double our medical respite capacity this year. more beds means more very sick

people finding refuge from the street corner with direct access to the support they need. our goal must be to help people to reduce their use of dangerous and debilitating drugs. our street medicine teams are dispensing special medication that reduces the craving intravenous users experience and in turn, reduces their usage. as i said earlier this month, i will continue to learn about the effectiveness of safe injection services. we must thoroughly assess whether the public health and safety benefits outweigh any negative impacts. >>[applause] >> well, we are now dealing

with a public health hazard regarding the disposable needles and we are stepping up our efforts to get the syringes off our streets. >>[applause] >> the department of public health and public works will install new needle boxes in hot spots all around the city and we are seeing success at our 17 pit stops. these boxes were. drug users do in fact [inaudible] needles. we are also increasing the number of trained cleanup workers to pick up needles that litter our streets and neighborhoods. you know, our neighborhoods are in fact the greatest source of pride in san francisco. we want the simple quality-of-life issues fixed and fixed quickly. from the street life that is out to the crosswalk that needs repainting to the tree that needs trimming, we respond to these requests to our new mayors fix it teams. meeting with neighbors and understanding needs that are unique to that neighborhood, we

are working together fixing problems proactively and making our neighborhoods corridor cleaner, safer, better places to live. >>[applause] >> residence, residents such as castro labored carolyn thomas who is here today, partner with a fixating to improve their neighborhood. thank you, carolyn. >>[applause] >> while the response has been amazing from our neighbors and small businesses, so we will quadruple our efforts at fixing 20 additional neighborhoods in 2017. >>[applause] >> a big thank you to mohammed and sandra zuniga and all the city partners work every day to fix our neighborhoods. >>[applause]

>> however, you know our fix it work is just one part of keeping our neighbors and our neighborhoods safe and clean. a strong crime prevention plan and increase community policing are also keys to having neighborhoods we can call home. i want to thank our newest supervisor jeff gee has already began to work on a neighborhood crime prevention plan which will complement the fix-it and homeless outreach efforts and the continued work of our dedicated police department. thank you, jeff. >>[applause] >> know, last year certainly challenged our city to be honest with ourselves about community policing relations. we always hope that we would be

different and i believe we are. we recognize that reforms are needed and we invite it, the united states department of justice to complete a top to bottom review of our police department. safety and reform happens because of thousands of men and women in uniform in san francisco. well, to all sworn law enforcement we appreciate you. i appreciate you. >>[applause] >> we put yourself in danger every day in the name of protecting our city. you are heroes and i think you. >>[applause] >> and to chief bill scott who is just days ago took his oath

of office, welcome. >>[applause] >> i know, i know you will make san francisco police department and you make it into the model 21st century police department. we are completely committed to implementing all 272 of the reforms that were recommended by the united states department of justice. we are well underway as new use of force trainings begin next week. >>[applause] >> but, you know reforms are more than just about new rules and tactics. it is having officers deeply committed to the neighborhoods that they serve. cops then know the heartbeat of diverse communities they protect. we have just hired 600 new officers and pushed the faces of our diverse communities

represented. in the last three police academy classes, 56% of the new recruits are people of color. >>[applause] >> these recruits and officers come from the communities they serve and they strive every day to earn the trust and protect the safety of those very communities. bike officers rodney and ronnie freeman who grew up in the sunnydale are here with us today could please, stand officers. >>[applause] >> this is the future of our police force. in the future is keeping the public safe in a manner that respects civil rights and the rights of all people placing the sanctity of

life above all else and always, always, thinking de-escalation before force. >>[applause] >> well, it is also time that we move forward with full implementation of body cameras. it is time to adopt the policy for the electronic control devices to give officers an option between a baton and a gun. >>[applause] >> chief, i know you and i have discussed this a lot and it will not be easy, but our responsibilities to achieve simultaneously reform as well as keep our city safe. i know you are up for the job and the city family welcomes you. well, these ladies and gentlemen, our challenges ahead. but we are in

a strong position to stand up for ourselves. stand up for our neighbors. to stand up for our values. for the immigrant laborer try to support a family, the union janitor fighting to afford san francisco rent, the mentally ill who need a support system that works for them could be hiv survivor who depends on healthcare. this is who we are fighting for. >>[applause] >> i know we may not see eye to eye on every issue and we must continue to have fierce debates, in a battle of ideas. constructive disagreements, and the consensus that we reach is what makes us so strong. but we

also have the need to ask ourselves if division at home makes us more vulnerable to attacks from the outside. we need to consider whether the local fights we pick our for power or for policy. are we making budget decisions impulsively or strategically? in preparation for what could be very long four years. because in the end, we all believe in the right to health care, the right to housing, the right to live your life free of oppression or bigotry. we will face challenges from those who do not share our views, challenges the likes of which none of us have witnessed in the last eight years. these challenges will test us. in order for us to meet these challenges we must be united. >>[applause]

>> when looking back with a year just past week about the progress that has been made by working together instead of against each other. so i stand before you asking for all of you to stand with me together, so that we can move our city forward and continue to be the shining light for our country, our america. >>[applause] >> because, if and when the federal cuts come, you will be united behind our promises and our values. ladies and gentlemen, we are ready. the state of our city is ready. we are ready to finish implement in solutions on housing, homelessness, and police

reform. we are ready to defend ourselves against cynical attacks from washington dc. we are ready to stand up for what we believe in and we are ready to fight for those who need us. >>[cheerring] >>[applause] >> ladies and gentlemen, we are san francisco. we are ready for what is to come. i say, thank you, to all of you. let's get ready. >>[applause] >> >>

>> one of the major tasks i

was asked to do is water system improvement program and one thing i looked at is about the 4.8 billion dollars wurthd of work and a lot of the work was regional. we looked at how can we make sure that we provide opportunities for san franciscan's and people in the region and so we looked at ways we can expand our local san francisco lb program. so, we thought about it and worked

with general manager at the time to form an advizry committee to talk about how to include local businesses in the region. >> i was on the first committee back about 10 years ago and the job changed over time. in the beginning, we just wanted people to know about it. we wanted to attract contractors to come into the system which is a bidding system and bid on some of these projects. our second job was to help the sfpuc to try to make themselves more user frndly. >> i like that they go out of their way, have contractors trying to teach and outreach to small businesses and lots of creative ways. help the community as well. there is so much infrastructure going on and repair, new construction

that i think is helping to get construction back on its feet. >> my faiv rlt part of the committee has been that we have played a opportunity for many small businesses. [inaudible] women owned business to come in and [inaudible] sfpuc. it is a great opportunity because some are so small they have been able to grow their companies and move up and bid other projects with the sfpuc. >> everyone i was talking about with any contractor [inaudible] and super markets and things like that and i realize the transition was on the sfpuc. he got that first job and knows

about the paperwork qu schedule and still works on this type of job, but he works with general contractors that also did other things. pretty soon it is like he did that one and that one. it completely changed his business. >> my name is nancy [inaudible] the office manager and bid coordinator for [inaudible] construction. worked on 10 plus puc, lbe contracts. today we are doing site maintenance on the [inaudible] chr site and currently the gentlemen behind me are working on every moving and basic specs of plants. in order to be success you need to work hard, bid low and keep a look at the sfpuc website for future bidding opportunity. >> this is a successful program

because it provides opportunities to regional communities that might not have opportunities to work for large scale projects. the sfpuc is a fortunate agency we have a lot of capital program that span over 7 counties who also to see how some businesses like [inaudible] and bio mass started as small micro businesses grow and expand and stay in the program and work on several projects before they graduate from the program. that is what warms my heart. >> my name is college willkerson, the principle for bio mass. bio mass has been in business since 2006. 3 partners. small businesses fill a niche but apply and

being a part of the program helped us be more visible and show the city and county of san francisco we can also perform services. >> this program had tremendous impact to the region. in fact, the time we rolled the program out was during the recession. this has h a major positive impact and certified over 150 firms in the rejen and collectively awarded $50 million in contracts, and because of the lbe certification it open many opportunities to work with sfpuc. and, i significantly helped the business. it is one of the major contributors to our success.