>> you don't have to go anywhere else we have pocketed of great neighborhoods haul have all have their own uniqueness. >> san francisco has to all . >> all right. welcome everyone to our land use committee meeting of monday, april 9, 2018. i'm katey tang, chair of this committee. to my left is supervisor safai and to my right is supervisor jane kim, and i'd like to thank the staff of sfgot tv.

mr. clerk, are there any announcements? >> yes. items acted upon today will appear on the april 17 board of supervisors agenda unless otherwise stated. >> supervisor tang: thank you. can you please call item number one. [agenda item read]. >> supervisor tang: thank you. i think we have paul ortiz from dbi here, or someone else. >> actually, i'm cheryl rose. i'm acting chief electrical inspector, andism ae here to say after looking over the proposal, i have absolutely no objection to it. it makes sense. there's nothing substantive to it, and if you have any questions, i'm happy to answer them.

>> supervisor tang: thank you. i looked over the legislation, it looked like it wasn't substantive, but can you take a minute and explain what we're doing. >> i looked over the cycles, and this was an old code section. and i think as we decided we wanted to amend it, we looked at the article, not so much at the title, and the title from three cycles ago carried through to now. it doesn't make sense any. >> supervisor tang: all right. i'm glad we're fixing that. seeing that, do we have any comments or questions from colleagues? okay. seeing none, we'll go to public comment. any public comment? seeing none, public comment is closed. okay. can we get a motion from anyone? [ inaudible ] >> supervisor tang: all right. thank you. we will do that without objection. item 2, please. [agenda item read]. >> supervisor tang: thank you, and this is again brought to us

from dbi. >> good afternoon. my name staez steve pinelli. i'm a chief plumbing inspector. this change is the reason we're bringing it forward. we actually thought it got heard already, but it wasn't. this is a change to circuit venting to allow just for specifically for certain installations and people to come forward with their types of plans if they plan to make changes to the venting system. reason why we have it is we have a combination waste and venting -- well, combination waste and storm systems, so we have multiple venting systems that are going on, installations that happen, and that's the reason why this is -- we're prohibiting this to just special circumstances. >> supervisor tang: okay. and also, from my understanding, we're also a little bit different from the state plumbing codes, again,

because of our unique topo graphical examinations, is that correct? >> that's right. >> so i didn't see any issues with this one, as well. okay, colleagues, any questions, concerns? okay. we'll go to public comment now. public comment? okay. seeing no public comment, public comment is closed. can i get a motion? [ inaudible ] >> and we can get a motion to move forward with a positive recommendation. we'll do that without objection. item three, please. >> clerk: >> supervisor tang: okay. thank you, and i don't know if -- okay. we have a legislative aide from supervisor cohen's office. >> thank you, chair tang. good afternoon. my name is brittany, and i'm here on behalf of supervisor

cohen in support of this resolution adopting ceqa finding for the san francisco puc's program. so after 50 years of operating at the existing southeast plant, using technology that dates back to the 1940's, san francisco is finally updating the water pollution treatment plant. and this is the biggest and most important project of sfip. we are long overdue in bringing the waste water treatment plant up to date and addressing the owed arrest that residents and businesses of bayview have been burdened with and had to deal with for far toong. so the supervisor's very excited about a technological advancement and with being able to implement something that will not only release the odors, but generate 100% renewable energy on-site. it'll be only be more energy

efficient, it's just be an overall benefit for the community. we support and hope that you will move forward with positive recommendation. thank you. tangs tang thank y . >> supervisor tang: thank you very much. and do we -- i think we do have presentations from our san francisco puc. >> good afternoon, supervisors. i'm karen kubric, the sources and improvement program from the san francisco public utilities commission. this is a 20 year investment in our waste water system. at this time, the funding has been authorized. over $2 billion of that 2.9 billion that's been authorized will be made -- improvements will be made at our southeast plant in district ten, and the biosolids project, which we're here today about, represents 1.2 billion of that total. today's item request for the adoption of the ceqa findings for the biosolids project and

authorization for us to move forward into the construction phase. i do want to thank supervisor cohen for her supportive leadership. she really has been wonderful for this critical project. it's a tough lift. positions for the improvements of southeast plant were developed collaboratively with the community. we had a digester task force, we worked with the southeast working group, also the southeast community commission, and really countless residents have weighed in to support us. it's very important to the puc that our oldest facilities are improved and modern eyesed so they will be a neighborhood asset. improvements were planned by looking at the site as a whole. the biosolided facilis facilit cornerstone of this site. it's the work horse of this facility, they're the

digesters. they're outlined in yellow. currently, our -- [ inaudible ] >> -- and started up in the early 50's, they were built directly across in homes, and they are odorous, and they are not seismically safe. the new project will be built on two parcels that will be incorporated into the plant footprint, allowing the entire facility to be placed in that area that's outlined in blue, set back along the raised caltrains track. the new facility will apply the best developable technology, we're dropping our digesters from nine to five. the level of treatment will be improved, so we have more opportunities for reuse of biosolids. we will capture the gas that is used in the treatment process and use that to provide energy to the plant, providing 50% of the plant's needs, we will also make tremendous leaps and bounds with odor control to all of the air is processed and cleaned within the plant

footprint. here shown in blue is a site layout what the future will be. the blue -- blue tanks in the back, those are the digesters. they'll be located as far from residences as possible. the energy recovery building is shown on the left side below the words caltrain, and new maintenance buildings will be built along jerrold avenue, providing a much more neighborhood friendly frontage. here's a rendering of how beautiful this will be, transforming the neighborhood in the future. the biosolids project team is completing the design and we're on target to start construction late summer. i also want to highlight something exciting, the biosolids project was selected for a $625 million loan from the water infrastructure and financing innovation act. this is the largest single

allocation of funds in this country, and this went through a large process. it was very competitive, and what this means is we'll have a lot of low interest money to preserve rates for our rate pairs. we are also pursuing a reinvolving interest fund for the balance. with that, let me give you some of the dates we've run through. our draft eir was published in may 2017. responses to commented were published in february 2018. the eir was certified at the planning commission march 8. we raised it at our own commission on the 17th. lastly i want to talk about our commitment to environmental justice. we did complete a separate but complementary analysis for the biosolids project. the report looked at 62 environmental socioeconomic indicators and determined through research and community input, including the different groups i talked early about the citizens advisory committee for waste water and the southeast community facility. we do have a report that

reflects the findings and a summary document which are on our sfwater.org website. i do have dast gray the director of the environmental justice program, and he's here to answer any additional questions. in short today is a very exciting day for us because we're here to adopt ceqa findings and request your release of the appropriated funds. if you have any questions, i'm happy to answer them. >> supervisor tang: thank you very much for the presentation. i know this was a long time coming, and congratulations on reaching this milestone here. colleagues, any questions or comments on this? okay. seeing none, then we will go to public comment. any members of the public that wish to speak on this item? okay. seeing none, all right, so can we have a motion on item three? [ inaudible ] >> supervisor tang: all right. we'll do that without objection. congratulations. all right. item four, please.

[agenda item read] tappi. >> supervisor tang: thank you. and i know we have debbie raffel from sf environment, but i realize i should start with supervisor fewer, the sponsor of the resolution. >> supervisor fewer: thank you, supervisor tang. thank you for allowing me to share a few opening remarks. the intent of this resolution is to establish local biodiversity as a citywide priority with a framework for interagency collaboration. as the supervisor of district one, which is surrounded by three natural borders: the ocean, and the golden gate park, as it was approached by

the sf environment, to author this resolution, i was happy to do so, given threats and how much we value our natural environment in san francisco. it actually took months of planning for this resolution to come together, thanks to the leadership of sf environment and sf planning, and it has brought 15 city agencies into the room together to give feedback on this resolution and to discuss what ongoing collaboration will look like between these city agencies. i am happy that this resolution is being supported by the sierra club, and the nature

conservancy, but i want to be clear this this resolution is a step towards a greater commitment to the biodiversity of san francisco and get city shake holde stakeholders in a room to accomplish future actions. i believe this resolution accomplishes this goal, and colleagues, i hope i have your support in this resolution today. we have a presentation, and i know there are representatives with several city departments in the room today to express support. i'd like to begin with druzing debb -- introducing debbie rafael, the director of sf environment. >> gamp. thank you so much for that introduction, supervisor fewer and for sponsoring the resolution. i also want to thank supervisor kim for sponsor is and chair tang for all of you for hearing the item today. so it seems to me to be a fitting time to celebrate and acknowledge the importance of the city's biodiversity as we kick off earth month. from ocean beach to treasure island, we are gifted with a unique natural environment that's worth protecting. the city has a long history of cherishing its natural heritage

and managing its parks and green space for biodiversity. this understanding of the importance of biodiversity requires an ongoing commitment. it's not a one-and-done, especially as supervisor fewer acknowledged in her remarks, considering the challenges that we are facing with climate change. at the department of environment, we work every day to help san francisco be both sustainable and healthy for all of its inhabitants, whether it be animal, plant or human, and we do this work in deep collaboration with our fellow city agencies. we often find ourselves in it a role of convener, and i think this resolution speaks to very intentionally to that role. last year, the commission on the environment passed its own resolution in support of the idea of biodiversity. they set forth a vision and a series of goals that they were hoping would be embraced beyond the confines of our department. and so this got us thinking,

what would it take to take t kernel that the commission on the environment started and go it into something deeper with roots that go beyond our downed res and go into each city department, one after another. and so the resolution you have before you today is a reflection of that work. and as supervisor fewer said, this was not something that was put together in a hurry. we spent months working with 15 agencies to answer some of the very questions that may be coming before you today to solve some of the dilemmas and to make sure that this resolution and the language that's in it is supportive of all beings' importance with respect to access, biodiversity, and habitat protection. we included the large land owning departments, like puc, like the airport and rec and

park, and we also acknowledged that smaller departments had a very important role to play as the city looks at itself, how can we support biodiversity. animal care and control, department of children, youth and their families. the libraries, all of these agencies, 15 in told actually have a significant role that they can play to further this goal. and so what you have before you today is the result of the months of work and dialogue, because what we believe is needed right now is a way of formalizing a commitment and challenging city departments to work closely in collaboration to convey their commitment to inspire action, and to protect and enhance our biodiversity. we've come a long way, and i just want to acknowledge and thank again, supervisor fewer for taking this issue on and for her advocacy of our natural environment. i also want to give a special shout out to chel see voyard for hr help in shepherding this

along. she is an amazing asset to supervisor fewer, and we thank her for her leadership. i would like to thank john rain, my colleague in the planning department, and staff. it really took a village to put this together, and all the department heads, all of my colleagues and their staff who contributed their time and collective energy. and finally, as i hand this off, i want to thank my own teammate, peter, who is the biodiversity coordinator for our department. there's probably no one with greater passion and tenacity with this subject, making sure that our urban realm is designed and newtured in such a way that supports nature. his work in this area has been

truly an inseparatipiration foo i'm going to ask him to come up and tell you what it does and it doesn't do, and then you will hear from some of our partner agencies in terms of their thinking about this resolution, so peter. >> thank you, debbie. good afternoon, supervisors. let me just pull up my presentation here. okay. so my name's peter brasto, and i am the biodiversity coordinate at the department of environment. i've been in there for a little over five years. just quickly, to give very broad context to what we're talking about today, as debbie pointed out, we are in the midst of a climate crisis, but equally important and urgent is

our biodiversity crisis, and this graphic shows around the world areas of high biodiversity but also extreme threat. all of our mediteranean areas, and others. scientists today are referring to the current unfolding of this mass ex-continuation of this biodiversity crisis on par of what was prompted by the asteroid and wiped out the dinosaurs. so this just brings it closer to home. i like to bring up this slide because it sets our city, our seven by seven in this natural environmental context in the bay area, kind of our biodiversity hot spot within the california biodiversity hot spot and really kind of paints

a nice picture of the diversity geography and just theecology in our environment. this is just hot off the press, the nature in the city map, 3.0, and this gives an illustration, a snapshot. what we have in san francisco in terms of our natural biodiversity, despite the fact that 95% of the city basically has been developed. and what was new about this map from our previous versions was that we -- thanks to my planning department colleague, we put in a layer for the urban forest, so you can see the parks and the natural areas highlighted, and you can see these wonderful illustrations of sort of example species throughout the city, and you

can also see the fabric in the greenery of the built environment, that was really more stark in previous versions of that map. we want to honor that biodiversity is throughout our city, throughout the urban viemplt. -shall did environme -- of our environment. i just wanted to give you a picture of what can be seen throughout the year. incredible amount of plants that are still growing here that are native to san francisco. between four and 500 just in san francisco alone, and the city's developed as it has, it's truly remarkable. and this, you don't have to read this. but it's to illustrate that there is a long history of making policy in san francisco on behalf of our biodiversity, all the way back to the park code in 1981, and then most recently at the end of 2016 where the joint planning and

rec and park commissions approved the natural resource management plan, and then -- which was upheld at the board of supervisors in february last year. and is so kind of drawing on that rich history and figure out how to -- though we have all these different plans and policies that were developed in relationship to biodiversity in san francisco, they're kind of all over the place, and they're not necessarily-dwsh and some of them are not as kurpt as our current thinking. and so as an interagency collaborative over the last several years, we worked on and came up with and posited these five goals of biologically rich eco systems and these are the five goals that aour commissio year passed. so now that's just some context, and imted to now speak very specifically about the current resolution before you.

and i think the title sums it up very nicely. it's certainly about celebration, which i just tried to do, and which debbie and i were trying to do for you today, and which you'll hear about from other speakers, but in addition it's to elevate biodiversity as a citywide priority and under frame a collaboration at a higher level, to encourage and figure out a way for us to figure out how to get all of our city departments working together collaboratively on behalf of nature and biodiversity in the city. this is our version of a biodiverse san francisco. san francisco is a place where our local biodiversity thrives in climate resilient eco systems connecting all san franciscans in nature daily and inspiring stewardship of our

unique natural heritage in every neighborhood. so in terms of the structure of the resolution, it's basically these five clauses. i just read the vision. that's the first -- resolve clauses, so there is he aa whole nice long list of whereas clauses, some of which i touched on. but in terms of what we resolve to do with this resolution. and then, the second resolve clause is basically all about collaboration that the 15 departments, including department of environment, we should all be working together toward improving our operations around biodiversity. that the department should fill out a survey, and we've been working on that, we have a draft already. we've been sharing that around with the departments and our intention is to -- our first meeting we have after -- with wrur pleasure, this resolution is passed, we would actually collaboratively finalize that sur say, so when we ask departments to talk about what they've done, what they're doing, what they want to do, to do that in a way that's easy

and not too burt sodensome. and then, the fourth clause is how the departments can make their commitment. we got a lot of feedback for this section, as well, so there's sort of a meenoomenuof choices. so a menu of ways for them to articulate what they want to do and how they want to do it. and then, finally, the last resolve clause lays out a bunch of instructions for the department of environment and what we should do, including bringing the survey to the departments, convening departments, figuring out how to do some kind of annual or biannual reporting that's not

too burdensome, again, and then also to report back to the board of supervisors. and so just wanted to reiterate, again, for a moment what this is about and in some way what it's not about, but mostly what it's about. so it's a broad policy statement, and so it basically gives departments the opportunity to develop their strategies for achieving the visions and the goals that we will finalize together. collaboration again is the major focus, and so all land use and natural resource management decisions, you know, throughout the different big land hill and departments still rest within the jurisdictions of those individual augss. and then, there is indeed an emphasis and this again was permultiple departments who really wanted us to see an emphasis on the at risk local native plants and an nationals that are native to san francisco. our natural habitats that we

still remarkably have despite this city being as developed as it is. so those are the most at risk, the most threatened. those are our contribution to global biodiversity. but meanwhile, it doesn't preclude -- there's a lot of concern about native versus nonnative plants. this doesn't preclude using nonnative plants in landscaping. we ask people very strongly not to plant with invasive plants, of course, to be creative in their design, but to ensure plants that they plant are climate appropriate and not invasive. there are plenty of plants that can provide habitat, as well, and if you get on the plant finder, sfplantfinder.org, you can find a list of those. so just to highlight the amount of work for putting this together, i want to thank all of the departments that are

working this effort and coming together collaboratively at the table. this kind of collaboration is not without precedent, this is a current collaboration that's titled san francisco children and nature, which city hall has actually been very supportive of, and it's made up of many of our city agencies, nonprofits, the park services, the presidio trust. and this is specifically around connecting children and families with nature and has a very strong equity foundation, as well. and so i'm going to -- i'm going to finish up, again, by just highlighting sort of the two spheres, one side or the other. so there's the natural environment of the parks, and then there's the built environment as represented by this beautiful green wall there on scott street. but what we want, what we're trying to do is create more cohesion and create a more

biodiversity in the city. >> i just want to go back to the previous slide because i -- you know, we've gotten a few -- not a lot but just a few concerns about the native versus nonnative, so i just wanted you to kind of repeat that. so the concerns that i heard was not about new plants, per se, but i think there might be some confusion about what might happen to existing nonnative plants, and then second the use of pesticide came up in some of my conversations, so could you address those two concerns. >> yes. i'll address both of those and when we get to the pesticide question, debbie might come up and help me. >> no, no, no, we can have her address the pesticide. >> sure. so with regard to the question about nonnative plants, as i said, it does not preclude the use of nonnative plants in landscaping. in terms of what is concerning for land managers and for biodiversity, sometimes you

hear oh, you want to get rid of that because it's not native. but what is concerning our plants that are invasive? so since 19th shen chury, many plants have been brought here from other parts of the world and planted in our botanical gardens and parks. there's a subset of plants that come from other areas of the world, but those are the ones that we term invasive, so disproportionately, they can cause real harm to our local natural environment and local biodiversity. >> supervisor tang: for a local person like me, what does invasive means? >> it literally means that these species because of the nature of their biology, since they came from somewhere else, they don't come with the eco

system checks and balances, the insects that prey upon them, they just spread and go out of control. french broom, the yellow flowering shrub, all sorts of different mediterranean grasses, and that's what invasion means. >> supervisor tang: okay. thank you. >> would you like me to speak to the pesticide question? >> supervisor tang: no. i think whoever you said can answer that. >> okay. that's fine. thank you. >> thank you. and before we proceed, supervisor safai has a question, as well. >> supervisor safai: just to add onto supervisor kim's question, because we did get a flurry of questions of this at the end, and folks were really focused on -- page four, line

eight, on one of the resolve clauses about the pursuit of opportunities to enhance native biodiversity on city owned lands that currently harbor indigenous plants and other wildlife habitat that could do so and are not otherwise dedicated to other city mandated uses? because the interpretation that i'm getting from some of the opposition is saying that when open space becomes available, that we're prioritizing natural areas versus parkland, and i don't know if that's a misinterpretation of this result, so i just want you to comment on that, please. >> yeah. so again, it's an encouragement, right, to continue to find places where we can restore biodiversity, and i think that language was part of our kind of interdepartmental conversations, so agencies, you know, don't want that to be the only in the highest and the priority in the sense that they -- their land is for

certain uses, and they don't want to be, you know, forced or whatever to have to restore habitat there when they might have a different use for it. so it's partly come frg the agencies, that language. >> supervisor safai: so it's not about returning it to natural areas, it's about saying if there's a particular use that the city has -- >> yeah, and there's lots of vacant city land, that is unused, and so much of that could be opened up and be for public access. some of it should not be for public access if it's already closed off. for example, some of our watershed lands. but in order to promote biodiversity in general and wholly across the city, there are opportunities jarcht to existing natural areas where lands open lands owned by other departments, we can look at and say we can do some habitat

restoration here, or we won't because another department of the city has decided it's a higher priority. >> supervisor safai: the way you said it sounds like because it sounds like if you have open space that has native biodiversity, and they currently harbor indigenous plants, then you want to continue to expand that unless there's a dedicated city mandated use. >> well, so -- in the case where there's other city lands that have native habitat that hasn't actually been preserved rkts right, so there's places where there's lands that are not owned by rec and park, that have native habitat, that have parts of our original natural heritage there, we do want to try to preserve those. this has been a long-term process that rec and park has been administering for decades in terms of administering an acquisitions list, so looking at lands, how should we

prioritize getting those and bringing them into the system, so it's really just validating that existing process, and then just kind of highlighting and yupd scoring these place that's still have native habitat that are not owned by rec and park, we want to pay attention to those and if we can, preserve those. >> supervisor safai: so going back to my original question, it seems like there's a little bit of a struggle between parks, open space and natural areas, and is that what you're intending to do with this particular line item. >> so i think you nailed it when you said it's actually the opposite of what the fare was. this clause is saying on the one hand, we have a commitment to try and restore and promote these precious native plants, and on the other hand, we recognize that there are multiple purposes for land, and that sometimes there are predetermined purposes that a city department might have for land that would preclude them from prioritizing biodiversity.

so it's actually building flexibility into the system so that if there is a use that is deemed more valuable than preserving the biodiverse natives, city departments have the ability to do that. so you understood it when you said it was actually the opposite of the fear. >> supervisor safai: okay. >> and if it's not written clearly, that is a fair criticism, and we could look at the wording of that before it goes to the full board. >> supervisor safai: i think that would be great. that seems to be the line that's getting the most attention. >> fair enough. okay. that's fair. and with respect to pesticides, supervisor kim, so again, this is a point of often interesting tension in the world of environmentalism where you have a wish to preserve native species that are under attack from invasives, and sometimes the attack is a pesticide, a

chemical. while that may feel nonintuitive, it is part of our toolkit of our city agencies when they look at how best to preserve entire habitats. there is an entire system in place to determine what is an appropriate pesticide and when is the appropriate use that happens within the department of environment through the commission on the environment where we look at east use of pesticides throughout the city -- each use of pesticides throughout the city. this does nothing to do that. it sichly calls out that we have an additional interest in preserving the biodiversity without getting in the way of -- without interfering with public health. >> so through the chair, if i may, just to clarify and understand, it's -- the ordinance calls for pesticide potentially as a tool to, i guess, fight back against invasive plants that are hurting other bio -- >> are you talking about the

integrated biopest management ordinance. >> i don't think i know this as well as you do? >>, no, no of course this is not an ordinance, this is a resolution. >> the concern i had was about the use of pesticides, which is always an alarming word to use, because of the use of chemicals. i guess i just want to make sure that it's a use to fight back against the nonnative plants that invades our biodiversity. >> we have pesticides that we use, reduced risk of pesticides. it has in that what the goals of the city are to preserve public health and habitat, and also to preserve the uses of our public land. this does not touch that in any

way. this is a resolution that says we value biodiversity period. i think the fear is is that -- if i may suppose what -- how i interpreted the letters was that when you raise -- if you raise biodiversity too high, it could be used as a justification for a scorched earth policy to use pesticides in an irresponsible manner. >> and i assume, i don't know, are there other ways to address invasive plants other than pesticides. >> there are. and the ordinance says that pesticides are used as a last resort, and departments need to show all the ways that they're ai had voluntarying pesticide use and use it as a last resort. >> do we collect data on the instances that city use pesticides? >> we do. >> it would be important to

know what we've done in the past, and i think if the public sees that how sparingly pesticides are used, that would help sway public confidence. you hear pesticides, and immediately, alarm bells go off, but if you could see the history how pesticides are used, it would provide some comfort. i guess, my last question, do we know these pesticides are harmful for dogs, pets, kids that are running around the area. >> i would assume any pesticide exposure could be harmful, and so we don't -- the ipm program does not only dictate what you can use but when you can use and how you can use it. there's notification, there's dyes, there's timing restrictions and there's placements. so in parks and play areas, they're banned. you cannot use a pesticide in a

ploun playground, so it would be in other areas that they're restricted in how they're used. >> so one of the concerns might be dogs running around. >> absolutely. >> and it -- how would the public access, you know, how often pesticides are used and when they are used. >> this is a publicly accessible database that they can go to, and i do not know the url. >> if someone can find that. >> we will get that while we are doing that and come back with you. >> it would be great for the public to get assurance in terms of the city's policy and how we've determined it in the past so it can provide some comfort inn terms of ensuring that we use it sparingly and when we have to, and i don't know even know when those instances would be. >> i would say the one thing i'm incredibly proud of in the city is our use of pesticides. when we use it, we own it, and we publish it, and we have an

annual public meeting to go overall of the uses with the department in the room. it's very, very transparent. kriss, chris, do you have -- >> yeah, the url is sfenvironment.org, and there's an interactive graph, can you look at it in different ways. my name is chris giegeeiger -- >> i'm sorry. sfenvironment.org. >> oh,/ipm for integrates pest management. >> i'm going to check it out. >> real-time. and i just wanted to add that pesticides are indeed a last resort and for the vast majority of tasks in biodiversity preservation, it's

done without pesticides. there's a big volunteer program for digging up french broom, for example. there's a lot of manual removal, as well. so... >> so you've decreased your usage of pesticides by 70 to 80% since 1996. >> correct, when the program got instituted, correct. >> okay. thank you very much. >> thank you. we'll turn it back to supervisor fewer. >> supervisor fewer: thank you very much, chair. >> supervisor, could i just introduce lisa fisher. >> i was just going to introduce lisa fisher, senior urban planner at the planning department. that's great. >> greetings, supervisors and fellow san franciscans. i am lisa fisher, senior planner with the planning

department. [ inaudible ] >> -- places that really have the opportunity to enhance things like biodiversity. the planning department is proud to be wrapping up our fourth annual biodiversity work order with the department of environment. it's been my privilege to serve as project manager and peter's right hand as we've engaged our agency partners to understand the city's biodiversity needs and unt its. lead ininclusive processes and cocreate useful tools. thank you to all the department leader and see sta leaders and staff that have contributed to us and we hope to work with you more. the sf on-line tool that peter mentioned is for use by everyone from residence

dents -- residents to city staff, and i think one thing to keep in mind is we will kind of get rid of that need to ever have to refer to our integrated pest management ordinance. we also have developed a biodiversity training module to enable city staff and the private sector to best use the biodiversity lens in their work. we are developing biodiversity guidelines to help standardize our direction to project sponsors, and we've been proud to be part of policy tools like this citywide resolution, and we offer our support today. our department's commitment to biodiversity is inspired on many levels. we feel that connecting with nature daily is a basic human need that enhances quality of life and happiness. greening may be realized in all of our urban forms, and we're very excited about that. our parks, plazas, yards, sidewalks, streets, building facades, rooftops, and as the city grows, dens and warms,

that will be even more important. it also supports or broader sustainability aims such as water conservation and quality, air and environmental justice, and especially as these elements are further stressed by climate change. so our support for this resolution at the citywide level can be summarized in five main points. first our shared of existing biodiversity policy and programs envision the value of a more cohesive san francisco statement. there's an urgency to build with best practices, and this includes maximizing cobenefits of these practices such as open space, neighbor greening and cleaner air for our communities, and especially with focused efforts on cost neutral improvements. for example graen greening with the right types of plants. we are fortunate that countless acres of new public parks and

open spaces are being designed in our city, not to mention new private open spaces and green roofs. we've been proud to work in central soma where our new regular liegs on green roofs will create almost 20 acres of biodiversity supportive greening. as we work with project sponsors and fellow departments on the design and quality of our physical environments, institutionalizing key requirements like biodiversity within the san francisco project process will help us leverage these processes towards a greener city, integrating eco logical systems also helps improve our resilience and helps ensure a healt healthy future for everyone. thank you so much for your consideration. the planning department looks

forward to continuing our support of biodiversity, and also sticking opportunities tog key diversities will help us leverage these opportunities towards a greener city. independent greating -- independent independent -- independent great -- independent grading systems helps also. we will open new pathways for implementation and maintenance funding for integrated more nature. thank you so much for your consideration. the planning document looks forward to continuing our support of bio diversity and seeking opportunities to integrate with other city priorities like housing, transportation and equity. thank you. >> thank you. so before we take public comment, i'd like to call up timber merris, the director of nature resources for

sf poc. >> good afternoon. thank you for the opportunity. i'm tim ramirez the manager. we are here to support the resolution. we have and will continue to work very closely with our department of environment colleagues on managing our properties in san francisco to protect and restore diversity. we work with the rec and park department and i think you will hear from lisa wayne in just a few minutes. just very quickly from our perspective, our commission has adopted a 2020 plan that includes six goals, one of them is focused on environment stewardship and a big part of that is protecting and restoring bio diversity. the water enterprise has adopted a policy and we just gave a full report about two weeks ago. the

re resolution is consistent with our waste water program to assist with storm water management in san francisco. we look forward to continuing to work with our city colleagues and our city department friends and bring the experience that we have, managing properties outside of san francisco to this effort here in san francisco. thank you very much. >> thank you very much. now i'd like to call up lisa wayne, natural resources manager for rec and park. >> i'm lisa wayne with the san francisco park department. thank you for supporting and considering this resolution and i also want to extend a thanks to our colleagues at the planning and the department of the environment for all the heavy lifting they did on this as well. the san francisco rec and park department has been promoting bio diversity in open spaces by restoring and protecting nature and wildlife

habitats throughout urban parks for decades. in february of 2017 the rec and park department received the support of the board of supervisors for the department's significant natural resource area management plan. this plan is a road map for the rec and park department that guides the protection of the city's natural resources and wildlife habitats and provides opportunities for human connections with local natural via recreation, education and stewardship. to build on the momentum of the effort, we support this resolution and the efforts to formally adopt a policy stance on local bio diversity for the city and county of san francisco. moving forward the rec and park's department natural resources team will be continuing to implement our natural resource management plan and to work on the conservation of species including threatened and endangered species such as the

california red legged frog and others as well as the restoration of native landscapes such as the old growth woods lands. in addition the department has trained and certified more than 100 gardeners in bay friendly landscape practices that aim to promote bio diversity and landscape practices in our parks open spaces and squares where possible. the department is implementing native plant scapes in lands to sustain bio diversity and neture and retain species. the rec and park department supports the department of the environment and the evident -- efforts to to

resoluti resolution. thank you. >> also michael lambert from the san francisco public library. thanks. >> good afternoon, supervisors. i'm michael lambert, your acting city librarian. i would like to thank you for sponsoring the san francisco bio diversity policy. the san francisco public library values our partnership with sf environment and we are eager to do our part in establishing bio diversity as a city wide priority. with 28 library locations spread throughout the city and with the leadership of our stagger library kelly trahan we feel that we are well positioned to collaborate. the library can help promote the experience and awareness of san francisco's bio diversity and responsible access and stewardship of nature through our public library programs. the san francisco public library looks forward to completing our

own department bio diversity survey and establishing our initiatives. thank you for your support. >> thank you very much. now carol bauch, the manager for the port of san francisco. >> good afternoon supervisors, i'm carol bauch. i'm here on the port's behalf to express our support for the bio diversity resolution. the initiatives that brought forth the resolution are consistent with the ports core values, they're consistent with the work that we are already doing. we echo these goals in our port strategic plan including our goal that calls us to protect bay and shoreline habitats. additionally we've recently completed the second of three

phases of our water front land use plan update process. we've been having public meetings for a year and a half and have had a specific sub committee of the working group dedicated to environmental sustainability. it's perhaps certain that we recommended 20 environment sustainabilities in our port projects. additionally the working group presented goals for equity throughout its process including access to jobs, recreation and access to nature was specifically called out as a policy recommendation.

i think the bio diversity resolution will serve all of these objectives. i'd like to thank our colleagues at department of the environment for working with the various city departments. you have really different missions, different jurisdictions and different kinds of resources to tailor a resolution that could fit all of us so thank you. >> thank you very much. i'd like to open it up to public comment now. i will call names. denise, bryan, mary, beckie evans and bob paul. please line up. you have two minutes to speak. thank you. >> good afternoon, denise louie. i wanted to start with a definition of the word bio diversity. it was coined by renowned scientist e.o. wilson

who referred to natural assembly of plants and wildlife. that's important to me because i'm interested in native plants as a member of the california native plants society. i can tell you there's hundreds of plants native to san francisco. so when you want to plant something that is drought tolerant in your garden think about the local native plants, not just, you know, those non-native suculants, please. so one of the reasons that it really does matter what we have in our gardens is that, well, okay, a few months ago a professor from san francisco state university explained that according to the historical records san francisco had nine species of local native bumblebees. nine species. two of them for sure have gone

extinct and another two are suspected of having gone extinct because we haven't seen them for a while. four out of nine going extinct on our watch and we are just talking about bumblebees. well, our plants need pollenators and they need our help. >> [bell ringing] >> and the wildlife do best with native plants so i want to encourage everyone to plant local native plants. >> thank you very much. next speaker, please. >> hi there. my name is mary ellen hanible. i'm a long time resident of san francisco and a journalist and author. i was the writer on the map that peter showed of nature in the city. i'm very excited about this resolution and this idea. one of the things i've learned as a writer on this subject is that one thing nature needs to

persist is connecttivety. plants and animals need each other in relationship and they also need space across space -- to be able to move across space to go from one place to another to renew their genetic inheritance of others with of their own kind and to rest and reproduce. so what are some of the things in the way of saving nature today, which is under seeing in a dire way, connectivity. the lack of connectivity among human institutions is one of the big problems. so we have all of these incredible achievements in san francisco to bring banative species to integrate new exotic species and to create more and more beautiful nature that characterize our beautiful city.