>> good afternoon. welcome to the san francisco board of supervisors land use and transportation committee meeting for january 8, 2018. i'm mark farrell chairing the committee joined by commission peskin and commissioner tang and

i want to thank sf gof -- gov for announcing the documents. >> items acted upon will appear on the january 23 board of supervisors agenda. >> commissioner: madame clerk item one. >> the clerk: revising 42 definition of gross floor area and remove redoundancies. >> commissioner: we have planning department here to speak. >> good afternoon, supervisors. the proposed ordinance would amend the planning coat to make amendments to the area. the department has not received any public comments and on september 7, 2017 the planning commission approved the

ordinance. they could be packed as calculated in the planning code. the first amendment would remove the distinction removing the accessory buildings from the definition of gross floor area. and accessory buildings in the calculation of gross floor area. it's problematic. the code does not define accessory buildings and parcels could be interpreted from being an accessory building and the definition are included in the definition of gross floor area. therefore there is no distinctive dove mission for the purpose of calculating gross floor areas for structure. the second amendment would remove the car share parking retirement. required car share parking say

mandatory condition imposed by the city. they're mandate ford projects that meet certain conditions. it's a betterment to the public and development community to exclude it from the definition of gross floor area in all zoning districts. this concludes the presentation. thank you. >> commissioner: colleagues any questions or comments? supervisor peskin -- we'll open it up to public comment? seeing none. public comment is closed. can i have a motion. >> i would be happy to make it forward with a recommendation. >> commissioner: we can take that without objection. mada madame clerk, item two. >> the clerk: the planning code article 8 to clarify nighttime

typographical clarifications. >> commissioner: thank you. same thing. planning department speak on item two. >> the proposed ordinance would amend the planning code to make clarifying amendments to article eight. the planning commission vote to approve the proposed ordinance. due to multiple revisions text has been dropped and spelling errors and some are not reflected in subsequent legislation. it's intended to correct errors in the code. this concludes my presentation. >> commissioner: thank you very much. any questions or comments? public comments is now closed. >> i'll make a motion for positive recommendation. >> commissioner: seconded by

supervisor peskin. >> commissioner: to make them happy. >> madame clerk, item 3. >> the clerk: prohibiting non-retail professional services and limit lot mergers and catering within the mission street nct and making appropriate findings. >> commissioner: thank you very much. >> good afternoon, planning department staff. just for background on the legislation, this is part of the many strategies identified in the mission action plan 2020 endorsed by the planning commission and transmit to the board last much. up on the slide will be the goal of 2020 and the categories under which the strategies and plan fall from tenant protection to economic development to advance the target goal and objectives of the plan. most of the strategies are

already being implemented. this is the second you've seen this year and we'll have a bigger legislative package with alcohol and controls in the mission related to what is next on your agenda today. i'll pass it to my colleague and i'm available if you have questions of the broader map 2020 process. >> good afternoon, commissioners. i'm staff at planning. just to give you a little bit of background about the specific amendments that we're proposing today, they are aimed at -- they come out of the map 2020 claudia mentioned and aimed at curbing business to business uses on mission street. they're aimed at easing land use pressures on retail businesses

on mission street. expanding options for art activities and catering uses within the nct compatible with neighborhood uses. protecting the mission street and continuing to provide space for project. so the specific amendments we are proposing include the removal of non-retail professional services as a permitted use known as administrative uses and catering on all floors, limiting lot mergers in the mission nct. on parcels fronting mission street to 100 linear feet and for projects with frontages with 50 and 100 feet it would require a special space less than 2,500

square feet. they'd have to break up larger ground floor spaces to including one that is smaller. so just on the last issue of the lot merger issues, it's probably the one amendment we've had the most back and forth upon we originally had a 150 foot limit. folks of theed requested a 50-foot limit and we wanted to limit lot mergers but not discourage project require a higher percentage of vmr. we looked at the soft sites adjacent to each other in parcels in the mission nct. we saw if we did a 100 foot limit and all the parcels were

developed to full capacity we'd get 105 units, 25% of which would be below market rate. you can get smaller projects below the 25-unit threshold for a 25% inclusionary so you end up in fewer vmr units is how we came up with the 100 foot limit. that concludes my presentation. i'm happy to answer any questions about any of these amendments. >> commissioner: colleagues, any questions or comments? we'll move on to public comment. i have a speaker card for item three, mark loper. if there's anybody else, feel free to come forward. >> good afternoon, supervisors. mark loper. i'm testifying on behalf of a sponsor for mission street. it's a 75-unit mixed income project. the project was first proposed in 2014. we filed formal entitlement

applications in 2016. it was approved by the planning commission less than two months ago on november 30, 2017 that was nearly two years after entitlement application was filed. this project does involve a lot merger over the 100-foot trigger talked about. while we believe state law protect the project from zoning change that are i am -- imposed we think a grandfathering clause would clarify the point and is common practice for legislation that affect housing projects like 2019 mission that are approved that haven't started construction yet. for example, this bord include provisions in recent legislation related to affordable house. the transportation demand management program in san

francisco's own density project just to name a few. grandfathering in this narrow instance recognizes the housing project that complied when the project was proposed and should not be further delayed or be subjected to different requirements after receiving approving. we request adding language to the ordinance specifying the ordinance does not apply to those that submitted a complete application prior to the effecti effective date. >> commissioner: thank you. next speaker, please. >> cory smith on behalf of the san francisco action coalition. i've been following this for a little while. regarding if it's a 50 versus 100-foot merger we've been work

with people on this in terms of the ground floor. we want to make sure everything second floor and up isn't negatively impacted. we don't want to see anything inhibit our ability to put subsidized affordable units on t the market. there is restaurants or retail or whatever we won't have an opinion on that. and specifically relate to the comments of the previous speaker as well, this has been a long-time conversation in san francisco about changing rules and moving the goal posts once everything is establish and we also ask projects already approved are not impacted by this simple, hopefully straightforward grandfathering.

thank you. >> commissioner: thank you. next speaker, please. >> good morning. commission economic development agency. i want to speak in support of this legislation and touch on a few of the important elements i think that are here and how they'll help with the stabilization of mission street under stress right now. i think limiting the lot mergers is important in terms of keeping things within a scope and scale that is community serving. historically we see which project end up being community serving. the accompanying store fronts -- though the legislation not specific to them, plays into that. i think the addition of adding art and catering is important as it will provide significant new

opportunities for our displaced art and cultural groups and new groups to grow and thrive. we have a growing system. we're having a all in all we have provisions for the street as well. >> commissioner: thank you very much. next speaker, please. >> i am here to speak about the controls. given there is a conversation now about what's happening with

the permanent amendments i want to weigh in on those. first, supervisor ronen is supportive and sponsored the proposed amendments. the outreach and the discussion that have gone on in preparing these has been take joan -- taken in time and there's vetting of data and there's been a result in the proposed amendments. they were introduced at the full board in november. frankly hearing about the concerns about the lot mergers today has been a surprise. i think any consideration of whether or not there's to be grandfathering shouldn't happen today. the supervisor will take it under advisement and we'll be able to look at what the potential effects are and if the

supervisor wishes to submit an amendment i'm hoping she'll be able to prior to the full board hearing. i think that's all i need to say. we noticed there are large lots on mission street and the fact that we're trying to preserve smaller ones and ensure diversity of scale for the housing and retail use she's reason behind this. thanks. >> commissioner: thank you. next speaker, please. >> good afternoon, supervisors. i'm with the latino culture district in support of the legislation. we're trying to make sure the smaller businesses in the mission are able to survive the gentrification in the neighborhood. there's pressure on the small

businesses with rent increases and investor-type businesses coming in and restaurants coming in and we want to make sure the playing ground is equal. it's one of the few places that are left that cater to low-income working class folks in the neighborhood. a lot of the restaurants that have moved in are expensive and not affordable for a lot of us. we also see the spaces below are being kept vacant for a long time. developers aren't able to rent them out. in particular the development on mission street, we wanted to work with the developer to get a neighborhood serving type business in the space but he refuse to deal with us and we're looking for large developments

coming in to have smaller spaces at the bottom to cater to the local neighborhood. thank you. >> next speaker, please. >> good evening, san francisco and everyone else watching. i support the mission district and everything they're saying. i wish you had someone other than a black man to come and support us. we don't have no businesses on fillmore. or have you seen fillmore lately? and i'm not here to point the finger at no one, particular queen bee. i go to district 5 and i can't get action because he's playing both parts and i know y'all don't want know say this but i'm not saying it for y'all but for the african american lack negros however you want to say us. i hope you hear me, peskin, because you did a wonderful job for herman.

you opened up the box and we can't stop. this is to the city and county because they say i'm not a media person. this say news bulletin being published so i'm part of the media. i don't want problems tomorrow when go to the chamber and i'm the only black person you stop. my name is ace, dammit in the city by the bay. i've been trying to see our acting mayor. i went to her office, i can't get in there because they don't know what the hell's going on. i'm the acting supervisor of the district 5. my name is ace. contact me. i know everything in the fillmore. when she was a little girl i was working in the fillmore. when she was born in the projects, i was working in the fillmore and i'm not saying this to get at you like this way but you need to see me. i'll be in your office in two

minutes. my name is ace and i'm on the case. that's a bulletin. i don't need a press pass tomorrow. you know who i am. >> commissioner: thank you, ace. anybody else wish to comment on item number 3. supervisor peskin. >> i don't know if this say question for staff or the city senior but i want to make sure the legislative digest the amendments i don't think is correct and explain what the legislation does. instead of saying that it would restrict lot mergers by requires lots along mission streets to be at least 150 feet wide is to be no more than 100 feet wide, right? >> deputy city attorney. our office committed a corrected legislative digest to the court

this morning. it's in the clerk's file now and will be in the file going forward. >> commissioner: i wanted the chairman to know i'm reading all the fine print. >> commissioner: the chairman appreciates it. supervisor tang. >> i have the same confusion this morning and i wanted to check in win supervisor ronen's issue. i'm hearing folks in public comment and i'm confused. said she supports the amendment but you meant the legislation -- >> right. she is not proposing any amendment to this package at this time. the concern about the grandfathering provision has an effect on the specific proposed project underway has not been reviewed and vetted and

nothing -- no decision's been made about any grandfathering provision. >> i don't know if there's been a reason given because i talk generically. i'm curious if there was rationale. >> has not come up to this point. >> commissioner: colleagues, seeing no other comments -- >> commissioner: the only comment i would make is based on the public comment of the attorney representing the project at 2918 mission street. that attorney represented he believed they were grandfathered. if that's true i suggest there's an off-line conversation. it's not scheduled as a committee report. you have until the 23 or 24 to

have the conversation. i say we not take that amendment and have that conversation and as council said he believe it's offered anyway. if that's true there's no reason to include it but why not have an off-line conversation. >> commissioner: okay. thank you. i think that would be great to have happen and understand what's going upon with that said, motion by a colleague. >> i'd move it to the full board with recommendation. >> commissioner: motion by supervisor peskin. supervisor tang. madame clerk, item 4. >> the clerk: in term zoning controls for cu authorization for commercial and storefront mergers by mission, cesar chaf

he is and protrero. >> so this is a resolution for interim controls. there have existing interim controls in place passed by the planning commission. the series of controls meant while some are expiring after their limit of a two-year term. there is one control, one interim control in place that is not yet reached its two-year term and that is the requirement that spaces being converted to restaurant use would have to go through a condition use authorization process. because there's time left on that interim control and because the need remains while the process of reviewing overall

retail use and protections continues, we would like to -- the supervisors would lake to propose to continue -- would like to propose to continue the control and additional use requirement for storefront mergers to create a space over 2,000 square feet. these would provide protection for diversity we see disappearing on mission street and i'd be happy to answer more questions. >> commissioner: thank you very much. colleagues, any questions or comments? we'll me of on to public comment? anybody wishing to comment? public comment's now closed seeing none. any follow-up?

>> commissioner: we instituted controls and they've been successful. i'd be more than happy to send this as a committee report tomorrow with board of supervisor. >> commissioner: we have a second by supervisor tang we can take without objection. adam clerk item 5. >> the clerk: and the western shoreline area plan and wern shoreline area plan to restore the ocean beach shoreline and make appropriate findings. >> thank you, adam clerk. we have our planning department. >> first, i would defer to supervisor tang but i'd be happy to co-sponsor this legislation. it's in supervisor tang's direct. i would like to thank staff in

particular work the coastal commission in such a fashion unlike many of the coastal plan amendments that get rejected. this one -- if we approve it -- i should not put words in my colleagues' mouths but it should be approved at the february or march meeting. >> thank you. through the chair, i want to thank all the staff involved in this particular effort. i know it was a lot of community meetings and so forth. i will say that just to point out some of the obviouses we need the amendment to be able to include issues such as addressing coastal hazard and sea level rises.

in terms of factually we know there's issues we're contending with.

>> we have not amended our plan since 1986. this is the first time we're changing the policies and coastal hazards are the driver.

they're erosion and climate level rise and those with problems we'll have more problems in the future. erosion can happen. it led to emergency measures by the public utility commission and public works permitted through 2021. some parking lots have been removed as they become unsafe. we're figuring out the right balances for the coastal zone. this amendment does not change anything in golden gate park.

it adds a coastal hazard section and we're trying to restore the shoreline while protecting resources and infrastructure and existing development from coastal hazards. there's six policies some of which are focussed on the near term treat plan and some are long-term standards because erosion are problems we'll continue to deal with forever. this has been a multi-year process and so from the project launch through some data and model work in policy development we had a community advisory group for the professional and

interagency advisory group because again there's extensive public lands with city and federal in the area. we had fire interagency meetings. we all understand what the proposed amendments are. it's had an informational and initiation and adoption hearing. they recommended adoption in october last year and pending local approve we'll submit to the coastal commission for certification. as supervisor peskin noted if they reject it, it will have to

start back at the planning commission. i think we have done our best to work through the problems so you don't have to do this twice. that concludes my presentation. i'm available for any questions. thank you. >> commissioner: we'll move on to public comment? i have two speaker cards. mike grizle and bill mclaughlin. first person, come on up.

>> one relates to this restrictions on new development in the erosion area. recently the sf zoo has build

their own science center atop at the apex at the erosion site. this is areal concern. there's been new blocking for the public and the zoo wants to build their own parking garage. we need help anything you folks can do. thank you. >> commissioner: thank you, next speaker. >> good afternoon, supervisors. i'm with the surf rider chapter and work in a leadership type

role. and we'll look at whether it can be relocated as an important >> there's a curiosity about the recycled water plant. we have information about that occurring in the same location

as the retreat is going on. >> next speaker, please. >> i'm here on my own behalf. at the community meeting may second of 2017, two issues were brought to staff's attention, one issue is the u.s. geologic survey how san francisco bay is contributing to erosion on the southern portion of the ocean beach and accretion of build up on the other portion. the other is the sanctuary. it's reviewing its management plan. it's reviewing the possibility of incorporating the waters off san francisco into the sanctuary. these waters are an exclusionary area and known as the donut

hole. they were brought to the attention of the planning commission on october 5 of 2017. this commission recused herself. >> commissioner: thank you, any other members push to comment? supervisor tang? >> thank you to those who came out to speak.

i do know that in speaking with the various agencies and including spur we haven't settled on anything yet regarding parking. it's not something we have arrived at a solution yet but it's not to say we have for sure taken away all the parking yet. it's an evolving situation.

>> i want to thank you the coastal commission for their work and look forward to passing it onto the full board as a committee report and getting to vote on it again at the coastal

commission. >> commissioner: we cannent -- entertain a mission. >> and we'll move it forward with a positive report. >> we can take that without objection. clerk, will you call item number 6. >> the clerk: item number 6 the resolution imposing interim zoning controls to require cu authorization for personal services uses. >> commissioner: we've been joined by supervisor who proposed the legislation.

>> they put together a neighborhood plan. we have been continuing until may or june of this year. it will have been a full year plus. the department of planning and office of economic and workforce development have led the effort with 26 members of the working group all neighborhood residents from all walks of life. we're happy with the process. the zoning control is meant to put a pause on these and hopefully by the time we're well along to put together the

planning, these zoning controls if this board and body supports that will then will have the tuns -- opportunity to come back and adjust later. essentially it would require institutional uses, private community facilities, social services and personal service uses like hair salons and nail salons and also other uses that aren't necessarily promoting of light retail in the corridor. [please stand by]

. >> and so when we come back to the planning commission and hopefully, eventually to the board of supervisors, we'll be looking at public mobility, land use and housing, which obviously these interim controls would impact, and how do we support the existing small businesses and continue to make it a neighborhood where folks can open up shop, continue to be entrepreneurial, and continue to support their families. i'm happy to take any questions, but it's important to think about these, thinking as a city, how can we advance

toward those goals, and i think as the supervisor said, putting a pause on some of the things that happen in the neighborhood can help us get some breathing room and space so we can bring forward some legislation that advanced us as a neighborhood strategy. >> thank you, miss tanner. i also wanted to bring up one other point. we have over the years, we have a group that's been there, working, the excelsior action group, and they have been working on a lot of these issues over the last 15 years, working with stakeholders, merchants along with the excelsior outer mission merchants' group, so there's been a lot of work that's gone into this, and the work that i've done in the community has been listening to this, kind of reflecting that desire. also, there's been behavior that has been not permitted that we're trying to help control for a lot of uses pop up that are not even permitted

uses, and so this is to put an additional eye on that, what types of uses need additional scrutiny. so that's it, colleagues, hopefully, if you have any questions, let me know, and we can move the conversation forward. >> colleagues, any questions at this point in time? okay. seeing none, we will open this up to public comment. item number 6. seeing no public comment, item is closed. >> i don't need this to be a committee report. this is fine, we're going to have some more conversations with planning and economic development and then we'll go from there. >> okay. so colleagues, could i have a motion to move this item forward to the full board? >> supervisor tang: so moved. >> and moved by supervisor tang and seconded by supervisor

peskin. okay. madam clerk, do we have any other business before us today? >> clerk: no, we are done. >> okay. that concludes our calendar. we are adjourned. >> self-planning works to preserve and enhance the city what kind hispanic the environment in a variety of ways overhead plans to fwied other

departments to open space and land use an urban design and a variety of other matters related to the physical urban environment planning projects include implementing code change or designing plaza or parks projects can be broad as proipd on overhead neighborhood planning effort typically include public involvement depending on the subject a new lot or effect or be active in the final process lots of people are troubled by they're moving loss of they're of what we preserve to be they're moving mid block or rear yard open space. >> one way to be involved attend a meeting to go it gives us and the neighbors to learn

and participate dribble in future improvements meetings often take the form of open houses or focus groups or other stinks that allows you or your neighbors to provide feedback and ask questions the best way to insure you'll be alerted the community meetings sign up for the notification on the website by signing up using you'll receive the notifications of existing request the specific neighborhood or project type if you're language is a disability accomodation please call us 72 hours before the event over the events staff will receive the input and publish the results on the website the notifications bans feedback from the public for example, the feedback you

provide may change how a street corridors looks at or the web policy the get started in planning for our neighborhood or learner more mr. the upcoming visit the plans and programs package of our we are talking about with our feedback and participation that is important to us not everyone takes this so be proud of taking ann the maus coney center project is transformation of the convention center and it is not only addition and increased space but also a transformation of the urban neighbor around it in a positive way. >> 25th largest convention center in the country but the conventions are

getting bigger so with this extension it is 13 largest >> we have been under construction a year and a half and set to complete the construction in 2018. it generated over $9 billion in san francisco >> 35 percent of viz #2rs coming to san francisco are coming to maus coney. >> 2500 jobs will be created. >> if we didn't do the expansion we would luce $200 million in taxes a year. the conventions they are talking about going other cities with ample [inaudible] and exhibit space and not come to san francisco. >> there is a lot of [inaudible] we are at a point now where our [inaudible] two halve oz the mos connie and think what we desire is one space. >> we are adding space about

200,000 space. we are connecting the two existing north and south exhibition halls that excavate under howard street to increase the largest exhibition space to 1 contig ws space over 500,000 square feet. >> the spot i'm standing in will be inside the lobby. the building will be pushed out to howard street and connected north and south above and under ground. >> when you go on the north our south side you enter into a hall that is divided into major ways >> this is public private partnership. the hotel industry [inaudible] splitting it up of the building. >> since we have a north and south howard street it [inaudible] to

make [inaudible] >> improving the bridges to make them more accessible so go over howard street >> [inaudible] developed to look at several different proposals for a light [inaudible] to work with that bridge and the selection of the [inaudible] he is on what i think is a beautiful piece that is very animated. you will be able to see it as [inaudible] cross the bridge and can see it as a resident of san francisco looking up. there is a second bridge and this bridge replacing an existing bridge over howard street that links yerba buena gardens to a childrens playground. make a much larger public space as well as aplaza space that brings you up to that in a visible way.

>> we worked on the playground to make it safe and invited and added more open space >> the area will be connected with the neighborhood. [inaudible] much better space for everyone. >> why is such a fundamental part [inaudible] could be thought of as columns and beams [inaudible] the areas that you walk to check in prior to [inaudible] all those activities [inaudible] opposed to [inaudible] we thought of ways to bring light into these occupied spaces including skylights and [inaudible] highest level of [inaudible] recycled steel.

the concrete is [inaudible] >> we will be harvesting all the rain water and storm water and reusing it. >> in [inaudible] they extend down into the aquifer level of the water level which means water is being pumped out to remove the pressure and there are over 15 million gallons of water per year that maus coney center pumps out so the water is wasted. our idea is disconnect the ground water system from the [inaudible] and reuse the water and save and preserve and use it for [inaudible] and use it for other irrigation uses. we have

excess water to fill up [inaudible] >> there will be limited traffic impact during construction >> there is a 8 month period where we have to take a lane of traffic out from howard street so we can expand the tunnel. >> we anticipate the construction to be minimal. >> [inaudible] >> make the center statef the art and much more competitive. [inaudible] >> having the space. [inaudible] underneath howard. having [inaudible] >> this is a [inaudible] worked with the residential, the merchants in the neighborhood, the non profits to make sure this is a vibrant area. >> even if you don't come to the convention and enjoy the public space, it is something that helps

revitalize the neighborhood and bring energy to the neighborhood and more people to the neighborhood and shops and retail and shocase san >> good morning, everybody. welcome to beautiful delores park. this is a long time coming. back in 2008, voters approved a clean and safe neighborhood parks bond which allocated about $14 million to improve this incredible park. our goal together we are going to build the new dolores park that is going to be built to last. it is going to retain all of it's important features, all of it's historic qualities, all of it's

essential beauty. but yet be built with the idea that this is whenever people come. >> we are going to be renovating all six tennis court's, replacing the basketball court with operations underneath so the staff has the ability to maintain the park. we are completely renovating the irrigation system and in addition to the operations we are building two new restroom buildings. this fund was part of the park renovation fund. we knew community was very supportive of a renovation fund. we engaged in a community process which we began with the park to do a detailed assessment of the condition of the park and

very details conversation about what we can do in the park and utilize what we can. >> parks are where people can gather and where to relax and a lot of people in the city don't have back yards and this is where we come to be with our community. >> 1, 2, 3. [ applause ] [ cheers and applause ] >> the work begins.