i want to thank several people: our executive director, will daniels, oversees our rad team, kyla reynolds and the leadership of hers, the weightless teams who get these units sold quickly, and the director of lease housing to move us to high performer status from hud. i also want to thank the residents. thank you for trusting us, and thank you for believing that we could actually get this done and frankly putting up with us. because you have had to experience so much stressful, time sensitive deadlines and rehabilitation happening in your home, which is incredibly stressful, and i just hope you're pleased with the end product. thank you so much. >> i'm still looking for supervisor peskin, but i know supervisor jane kim is here. want to come up and say a few words? >> supervisor kim: i am here

on behalf of supervisor peskin who is currently chairing our san francisco county transportation authority meeting as we speak. he excused me from the rest of the meeting so i could represent him and his office, but also just as a former chinatown community development center aaluminlunni, i'm just proud of the work you have done today. rad and the rehabilitation of our public housing units is no small feat, and it says a lot that this is the first rad project to be completed in the city. just as it is important to build low income new afford annual housing, it is just as important to rehabilitate existing low income housing in our city.

227 is reminiscent of a time when our country invested in housing. that was many decades ago, and now 50 years later, we are -- we are having to invest in making sure that these units can stay permanently affordable for our families, our seniors and individuals with disabilities much into the future, so this project is incredible important. i'm so important of all of the partners that came together on board to make today possible for our 50 households here at 227. and i do want to acknowledge many of the staff members that worked to make this -- this possible. and dar acknowledged the tenants for your trust in us and having been involved with many public housing transitions. it is incredibly tough, and it's easy to understand why residents don't trust working with government and relocation

and rehabilitation processes, but we also know that the staff play a very important role in building that relationship of trust and ensuring residents that they'll be able to come back to their homes of many, many years and often decades, and so of course want to acknowledge our great fareless leader, reverend norman fong. i'm about to acknowledge them, the relocation team, cathy lamb and tony leigh, our community organizers donna chan and wendy chan, and resident services. thank you so much. this process is so difficult, and the reason why we're here today is really because of so much work of the staff on the ground that's made this possible, and of course the many people that have already been acknowledged, the mayor office and all of our financial

partners, but the staff, you do tremendous work on the ground, and thank you and congratulations to everybody. >> okay. you know you need money to get stuff done. who you going to call? you're going to call ari? senior vice president of developing, ari, of bank of america and merrill lynch. >> good afternoon. it is a pleasure to be here this evening -- this morning, this afternoon, today. i guess it's kind of strange. i remember what this place looked like. it didn't look anything like it looks like today. i remember what the residents looked like when i came to visit before ccdc took over the property. it doesn't look like anything like what the residences look like today. this has been an amazing transformation, and it's been an amazing transformation because of many, many, many

people. a city, state and local government to get this done. first, i'd like to thank the former mayor. he was really a great partner. he was the affordable housing mayor in san francisco. he was one of the rehabilitaas of america did this project. we knew how committed he was to affordable housing at his core, which is the reason we did this. i'd like to thank the current mayor farrell, supervisor kim, and of course the mayor's office of housing and workforce development, ed hartly, and many, many other people that i see, lydia, in the crowd. you guys did an amazing job. you made the impossible possible. and then, of course, the people that do the work: ccdc. you guys -- just look at this project. it is -- it is really -- we use this -- just -- you know this picture often because if it's hard to believe it's the same

building, what it is today versus what it was before. and of course, the san francisco housing authority, you were willing to hand over your baby, and i think it's going to do pretty well. so, you know bank of america had its roots in san francisco. we started actually as the bank of italy in 1904. we've been here during the good times and the bad times. we've been here during the 1906 fire, when our founder went out with literally cash in hand and helped rebuild the city. we helped build the golden gate bridge and the ferry building. that's why when mayor lee came to us with a crazy plan to rhenvate 29 projects and 3500 units and finance it in two years, we were all in.

and so this investment's really huge and transformational for bank of america, too. just to give you an idea, we invested $2.2 billion in financing in rad. last year, bank of america, one of the largest banks nationwide, invested $4.2 billion, and we invested 2.2 here. [applause]. >> so we're committed to san francisco, we're committed to building affordable housing. we're also committed to our nonprofits. ccdc has been a neighborhood builder, our bank of america charitable builder over the years. our over 4,000 associates volunteer over 40,000 hours a year in san francisco, because we all believe in san francisco to the core. i'd like to thank some bank of america associates who work odd

this. we had dozens and dozens of people, and two people here who worked on it. rob reinhart and kr ar-- carri horton, thank you for your work. i love seeing affordable housing, i love seeing renovated units, and i also love seeing new units, and i can't wait for the next grand opening. >> now, this is the most important part. we need to hear from the residents themselves. you going to come up? oh, anthony. i remember, we met two years ago in that little community room that we just tripled the size of. and i want to acknowledge wynn palmer, too, the president. standup a little bit. come on. look grand. yeah.

give him a big hand. he said he wanted to sit back there with all his women over there. okay. >> okay. [ speaking native language ] >> my name is anthony wong. i've been living in this building for over 20 years. i like this building because of its location. it has easy access to public transportation. [ speaking native language ]

>> in the past, every household in this housing unit, in the past, they had miroaches, and they were very difficult to get rid of. the fire alarm sound would often go off with no reason. firefighter would be here all the time. it was very disturbing to the residents. [ speaking native language ]

>>. >> now the chinatown community development center has taken over, they renovated the

building inside and out. it's like new. now the courtyard has flowers, trees, chairs and table for the staff to rest. there is full-time staff on-site. we have different kinds of activities to entertain us and to socialize with neighbors. it adds joy to our lives. [ speaking native language ] >> now i hope everyone can give a round of applause to chinatown community center and ageing in place, please. >> we're almost there, folks. okay. you know, before the ribbon cutting -- where's the ribbon? okay. oh, okay.

you know where it is. just wanted to -- you know, i can't explain it, but china dotown cdc staff putt so much, and it's that that makes housing possible with the residents, and i want to bring up the project manager, joanna ladd, and her mom and sister are here. i met you in washington, d.c. were you doing housing there? any way, joanna, she loves our residents. she -- i love you. [applause]. >> thank you, norman. i'm joanna. as he said, i've been the project manager at 227 bay since the project began in 2014, and we have so many to thank for how the project turned out. please take a look inside of your program for a full list of our partners. we would like to call some out

by name. our general contractor, am1 construction, and our architects. so not only does this project look great, it actually came in under budget and returned money to the city, and that is -- [applause]. >> thank you. >> can we have it back? >> and that is a testament to the quality of the design work and the quality of am1's construction work. we have a host as you have heard of public and private financing partners who helped us build a budget big enough to do the important expensive things like install a full sprinkler system at this building. of course the u.s. department of housing and urban development created the rad program in such a way that allowed us to rehabilitate the building for its existing residents. our state funders, the california debt limit allocation committee and the tax credit allocation

committee, no major affordable housing project in san francisco moved forward without these funders. our permanent lender, freddie mac, and our investment lender, bank of member. they made sure there were activities for residents during construction to ease the stress during construction, which tells about the kind of private partner they are. [applause]. >> enterprise community partners, neighbor works america, and the local initiative support corporation all provided chinatown cdc with capacity building funding to make sure that our organization was ready to take on the challenge of bringing on 600 units of public housing into our portfolio. the san francisco -- yes, sure. [applause]. >> the san francisco department of ageing and adult services is funding our program to bring on-site supportive services for residents to this building for the first time in its 47 year

history. [applause]. >> and of course, the san francisco housing authority and the mayor's office of housing, it has been so inspiring to work alongside these self-less, hard working city staff to correct 50 years worth of wrongs against our public housing residents of san francisco. this was a monday amountal challenge from a policy standpoint, and it is one that our city staff dove into because they rightly saw it as the last chance to save public housing in san francisco. we at chinatown cdc are lucky to have a huge expert team of developers. i just particularly wanted to call out the california partnership housing corporation, which was the architect of the incredibly complicated financing program that allows the city to move

all 29 of its rad projects forward on virtually the same timeline. [applause]. >> next to last, i want to acknowledge the work of chinatown cdc staff. our housing development construction management, property management resident services community organizing, relocation, asset management, accounting and executive staff met every week for over three years to make sure that this building lived up to our vision of what public housing could be. every single person who touched this project works entirely too hard. they think about our residents in every moment, and that is the power of community based housing development, and that is the power of transferring public housing to the very advocates who have been fighting for better living conditions in public housing for over 40 years.

[applause] >> and finally, thank you again to the residents of 227 bay street. the residents of 227 bay street endured two years of construction in their homes so that this building could be preserved both for them and for future generations of san franciscans. that is an incredible sacrifice, and the residents of this building met that call. as you can tell from mr. wong's speech, with grace and patience and understanding. and so thank you for believing in us, and i think the because west we can acknowledge your sacrifice is to wrap up the program. so we will be leading tours from right in front of the elevator on this level as soon as the ribbon cutting is done. we'll also be serving refreshments in the community room right through those double doors, so thank you for coming and take it over, fearless

leader. >> didn't she do a great job? and her mom is here. you're going to help -- as they setup the ribbon, i need your help because i always believe in the people's blessing, so at the right time, i'm going to have you repeat the words after me. may the residents and all who come to 227 bay be filled with the rad spirit of -- repeat after me? peace! joy! hope! lo love! brersity. all right. could you come on up and help -- you're the coalest president. you know, i think trump needs some sprinkler work there, too. but any way, we've got more

sprinklers. all right. all the big shots, come on up.

>> i personally love the mega jobs. i think they're a lot of fun. i like being part of a build that is bigger than myself and outlast me and make a mark on a landscape or industry. ♪

we do a lot of the big sexy jobs, the stacked towers, transit center, a lot of the note worthy projects. i'm second generation construction. my dad was in it and for me it just felt right. i was about 16 when i first started drafting home plans for people and working my way through college. in college i became a project engineer on the job, replacing others who were there previously and took over for them. the transit center project is about a million square feet. the entire floor is for commuter buses to come in and drop off, there will be five and a half acre city park accessible to

everyone. it has an amputheater and water marsh that will filter it through to use it for landscaping. bay area council is big here in the area, and they have a gender equity group. i love going to the workshops. it's where i met jessica. >> we hit it off, we were both in the same field and the only two women in the same. >> through that friendship did we discover that our projects are interrelated. >> the projects provide the power from san jose to san francisco and end in the trans bay terminal where amanda was in charge of construction. >> without her project basically i have a fancy bus stop. she has headed up the women's

network and i do, too. we have exchanged a lot of ideas on how to get groups to work together. it's been a good partnership for us. >> women can play leadership role in this field. >> i tell him that the schedule is behind, his work is crappy. he starts dropping f-bombs and i say if you're going to talk to me like that, the meeting is over. so these are the challenges that we face over and over again. the reality, okay, but it is getting better i think. >> it has been great to bond with other women in the field. we lack diversity and so we have to support each other and change the culture a bit so more women see it as a great field that they can succeed in.

>> what drew me in, i could use more of my mind than my body to get the work done. >> it's important for women to network with each other, especially in construction. the percentage of women and men in construction is so different. it's hard to feel a part of something and you feel alone. >> it's fun to play a leadership role in an important project, this is important for the transportation of the entire peninsula. >> to have that person -- of women coming into construction, returning to construction from family leave and creating the network of women that can rely on each other. >> women are the main source of income in your household. show of hands. >> people are very charmed with the idea of the reverse role, that there's a dad at home instead of a mom. you won't have gender equity in

the office until it's at home. >> whatever you do, be the best you can be. don't say i can't do it, you can excel and do whatever you want. just put your mind into it. >> we broke ground in december of last year. we broke ground the day after sandy hook connecticut and had a moment of silence here. it's really great to see the silence that we experienced then and we've experienced over the years in this playground is now filled with these voices. >> 321, okay. [ applause ] >> the park was kind of bleak. it was scary and over grown.

we started to help maclaren park when we found there wasn't any money in the bond for this park maclaren. we spent time for funding. it was expensive to raise money for this and there were a lot of delays. a lot of it was just the mural, the sprinklers and we didn't have any grass. it was that bad. we worked on sprinkler heads and grass and we fixed everything. we worked hard collecting everything. we had about 400 group members. every a little bit helped and now the park is busy all week. there is people with kids using the park and using strollers and now it's safer by utilizing it.

>> maclaren park being the largest second park one of the best kept secrets. what's exciting about this activation in particular is that it's the first of many. it's also representation of our city coming together but not only on the bureaucratic side of things. but also our neighbors, neighbors helped this happen. we are thrilled that today we are seeing the fruition of all that work in this city's open space. >> when we got involved with this park there was a broken swing set and half of -- for me, one thing i really like to point out to other groups is that when you are competing for funding in a hole on the ground, you need to articulate what you need for your park. i always point as this sight as a model for other

communities. >> i hope we continue to work on the other empty pits that are here. there are still a lot of areas that need help at maclaren park. we hope grants and money will be available to continue to improve this park to make it shine. it's a really hidden jewel. a lot of people don't know it's here.

>> supervisor tang: good afternoon.

welcome to our land use committee meeting of april 16th. i'm katy tang. we have vice chair supervisor jane kim and supervisor safai. we will be joined by supervisor peskin. we would like to thank jessie larson and mia hernandez and our clerk, erica major. do you have any announcements? >> clerk: yes. make sure to silence all cell phones and mobile devices. items acted upon will appear on the april 24 board of supervisors agenda unless otherwise stated. >> supervisor tang: can you call item 1. [reading item #1] >> supervisor kim: thank you. i believe we have public works here. >> yes. rachel from san francisco public

works. a list of projects will be funded by $23 million, state road maintenance and rehabilitation count account funds. it was created by senate bill 1, which will raise over $5 billion for transportation throughout the state of california. one of the measures of sb-1 is requiring local governing bodies to adopt annual resolutions approving the project list. that's why i'm here today. public works has identified six various locations projects for next year. that will include 220 blocks, which is approximately 1/3 of the program's expected output in the next fiscal year. each location project typically includes 25-45 residential blocks spread throughout numerous neighborhoods. we use this project delivery approach for for the si purposes because we are able to group --

for efficiency purposes. to provide more kcontext, your packet includes the blocks. the blacks planned for next fiscal year with all funds and other sources as well as all the blocks planned for the next five years. i'm joined by our paving program managers and we are happy to answer any questions. >> supervisor kim: thank you. i had a chance to look at it. it looks like it is prioritized by pavement conditions. >> and we look at coordination opportunities with other projects and other agencies. >> supervisor tang: great. hopefully we can hurley -- hurry up and use this funding in case

sb-1 is a repealed. do we have any comments? seeing none. we will go -- did you have anything? no. okay. we will go to public comment on item 1. any members wish to speak? seeing none, public comment is closed. can we get a motion on item one? supervisor safai. >> supervisor safai: sorry. send this item to the full board with positive recommendation. >> supervisor tang: okay. we will do that without objection. thank you. all right. item 2. please. [reading item #2] >> supervisor tang: thank you very much. we have a sponsor here, supervisor peskin. >> supervisor peskin:. i think the measure sets it forth. i have one small amendment,

which i'm passing out which is on page three, line seven at section 106a.4.1 to insert the word either and i will pass those to the committee members. i'm happy to answer any questions. i want to thank staff at the department of building inspection and the building inspection commission that recommended these clarifications by the unanimous vote of those voting inspection commissioners that were present. >> supervisor tang: thank you. supervisor safai. >> supervisor safai: so, it says in here 2016 and the code there was an omission and it says that there's a reenacting paragraph. what type of construction is it?

>> supervisor peskin: i believe we have somebody here from building inspection who can answer that or maybe deputy city attorney can answer that. let me just see if i can find that provision that was inadvertently omitted in 2016. >> supervisor safai: is that the heart of this act? i understand it's 25% slope grade. >> supervisor peskin: so, originally, this legislation which requires peer review of work done by a licensed geologist or engineer, something we have learned about for projects that are in seismic hazard zones or in steep slopes defined as 25% came about because the original legislation referred to a map that is now outdated called the bloom map. and so, that language has been

deleted and the language that says exceeds 25% slope grade is added as determined in the scope of this act. as to what was omitted, i see deputy city attorney -- >> i have it hear i think. but i believe that that part said it would apply to construction work that include the construction new building, structures having over a thousand square feet of projected roof area or horizontal vertical additions having over 500 square feet. >> supervisor peskin: right. >> supervisor tang: also applied to any of the following activities, shoring, underpinning, excavation, grading of over 50 cubic yards or any other construction may have substantial impact. >> supervisor peskin: that's

right, and it is on page 13. >> supervisor tang: from my understanding it still allows for the building official to provide their expert opinion, but just also clarify when these requirements apply. >> supervisor peskin: that is correct. >> supervisor tang: supervisor safai, do you have any other questions? >> supervisor safai: that was one. and so, in terms of section 106a .4.1.4, line 21 on page three, so, currently is it that their being required to have the structural advisory committee review the reports and kurntdsly -- currently what is the practice? >> supervisor peskin: my understanding, that has been the existing practice. we can go to -- and dan, do you want to -- or mr. strom?

mr. lowery. you guys are hiding in the audience. >> good afternoon. dan lowery. deputy director permit services. so, the current practice right now is that the slope or the listed area off the map, if it's determined it's 25 degrees or greater, it's the option to have -- some of the -- mandatory review and they have the identified areas for that. and the other ones are options where they look at the site permit and determine if a sac review is required. >> supervisor tang: what i read was that in the legislation the review by the structural advisory committee, what you are asking about, supervisor safai, is it will be mandatory instead

of discretionary. >> supervisor safai: just for the frontprojects of 25% or mor? if you have on the slope, do you have to submit to the structural advisory committee? >> yes. there's a little confusion on our part as far as 25% versus 25 degrees. so, if it's 25 degrees, according to the maps that we have, yes, it could be under structural advisory committee. we do very few sac reviews a year. >> supervisor safai: i know that currently that the they shall -- the threshold is high. >> right. >> supervisor safai: what's the difference between current and what is being proposed? right now, what's the threshold to go to sac we view?

>> if it is 25% rate, it will increase the area of the existing maps that we have. >> supervisor safai: what is the current map? what grade triggers the sac review? >> the map we have it can increase 25%, maybe even more. that would have to be under review. >> supervisor safai: this is a significant increase in workload for your department? >> yes, it is. >> supervisor safai: is this the right threshold? >> it's -- [indiscernible] >> the code advisory committee looked at this and they weren't sure of the 25% because they didn't know where that figure came from. >> supervisor safai: that's my question. and i'm not trying to slow down supervisor peskin's proposal. i just want to make sure staff has had the right time to weigh in and make sure that this is the appropriate slope. so, do you need more time to work out what -- with the

proposed sponsor so we have clarity on this? >> supervisor peskin: i would submit this wednesday to the building inspection commission and they are the policy body for the department. they recommend this by every member who was there for that vote. and by the way, if you look at the bloom map, virtually all the areas on the bloom map that were the subject of the original legislation were 25% or more. so, i think the issue here that supervisor safai is getting to is the issue that is set forth in the mandatory submittal of reports and geotechnical review, which in the previous iteration were required to go to design review by a licensed

geotechnical engineer. and in this particular version, are required to do to the structural advisory committee which is really a body that has the expertise to do it. relative to workload, this is all a function of fees that are paid for by the developer -- the fundamental thrust of this update is just to make sure that there is the proper level of peer review on frontals that -- projects that are in seismically challenged areas as we have experienced as mr. lowery said at edge hill, where there will have been numerous failures and other parts of the city. telegraph hill has had numerous failures. so, it seems like having this level of oversight and peer review is the right, safe way of going about building in very challenging areas. >> it was approved by the building inspection commission. >> supervisor safai: right. is there a difference of opinion

between staff and the commission? >> i think you need an engineer to report. i'm not an engineer. but they could tell you the statistics. >> supervisor safai: what i'm trying to get at is we have a significant portion of our city that is on slope and i agree with the thrust of what supervisor peskin is trying to accomplish. i just know that going to the sac review adds a significant amount of time and project. and these projects, are they mainly additions or are they mainly new construction for the most part? >> it could be both. in edge hill, i know there's additions under sac review and it could be a new project. it is within the area of the map. >> supervisor safai: what i'm getting at -- so, that's one. secondly, you said that staff hadn't had an opportunity to weigh in in terms of giving you a few idea of how much

additional work this is going to add to your department. >> i think this review was done under the corrode advisory committee. not our staff. >> supervisor safai: anything else you wanted to add, supervisor peskin? i understand the commission approved it, but i'm getting some differences of opinion from staff. so, i don't know how you want to proceed. >> supervisor peskin: i would like to proceed and move the amendment and would hope that the committee would send this piece of legislation that has been kicked around for quite some time to the full board. >> supervisor tang: one last question only because our office has been working a lot with dbi on accessibility for businesses. one of the issues that came up in our conversations, especially recently was just the number of building that might have to comply with the a.d.a. law. but they might be located in chinatown or so forth where there are a lot of hills and

slopes. so, how would this impact some of that work? because i know a lot of businesses are a little bit worried and hesitant about accessibility and how do we balance the need for safety as well as helping people comply? >> this program wouldn't affect the accessible because there's a square footage that is a minimum before required to have that provision. [indiscernible] >> the slopes are existing. >> supervisor tang: thank you. >> that is a much bigger program and area where they have to comply. >> supervisor tang: okay. do we have any other questions or discussion on this? okay. why don't we go to public comment on item 2 then. >> i'm bob. i wanted to ask you to support

supervisor peskin's legislation as requested to be amended. it's important to not talk about a.d.a. without knowing i think all of the ramifications of it. one of the provisions was if a digs didn't have enough pun -- business didn't have enough money at the time, it should lay away money so that at a certain point in the future, it would have enough money to start that process. but there was no provision that building inspection departments or planning commissions do any training. so it was never passed along and never enforced. a lot of jurisdictions are behind the time in terms of trying to get businesses to put money away. i'm going to bring that up because some years ago, san francisco had an unreinforced masonry bond fund and it may be that it is something in the future to consider whether

there's some possible low interest paid down fund that can help businesses make themselves accessible. but in the meantime, anything that can be done to make a structure safe or safer, whether it is an addition, a new home, a small office building, it makes it helpful for everybody that are less likely to have people get injured in a collapse or as a hill starts to slide down. so, i am going to suggest please move ahead. >> supervisor tang: thank you very much. next speaker, please. >> good afternoon, supervisors. my name is pat. i think i'm the only structural engineer in this room. probably the only person qualified to talk about this and i have been practicing since the '70s. i was the engineer brought in for the land slide. very familiar with sac and the bloom rules. the bloom rule is a 20%

threshold that requires you to then go to the map and because the map is ar kay yak -- ar kay yak, no one uses it. it is long been superceded by the state hazard seismic hazard map. but the bloom map started off with a threshold of 20% and if you were at 20%, then you must look at a subsequent map. and there's a hundred of them. subsequent maps. you go from the big map and to the little maps. and those little maps are a block by block zone of slide. using the bloom map at 20 or 25% is totally wrong. if you're going to use the bloom map, you have to also use this 100-map text. the building department didn't have it. i have a copy of it. i have given a copy of my version of it. if you want to use the bloom

map, you also have to set the threshold of these 100 microslides. we know where they are. but those slides and the map have long since been superceded by the seismic hazard act map. [bell]. >> this is a bag of sand. i can't get sand to slide at 25%. it slides at 25 degrees. so, this percent and degrees have been confused. the correct number is 25 degrees. that's 50%. that's two to one. that's the stability of sand. the weakest material in the city. [bell]. >> so, i think there's a confusion on percent versus degrees. [mic turned off] >> supervisor tang: thank you very much. are there any other members of the public who wish to comment on item 2? seeing none, the public comment is closed. colleagues what would you like to do with this item?

>> supervisor peskin: madam chair, this has been through staff. obviously the bloom map is archaic and this is an attempt to replace the bloom map with some objective standards. i am not a structural engineer or a geotechnical engineer. this 25% number has now been through legal review and commission review. this is the first time i'm hearing that it should be degrees and not percent. the bloom map was actually as he said, 20%. not 20 degrees. but if mr. strom, you want to address this on the technical side or mr. lowery as to whether or not it should be 25 degrees as compared to 25%. 25% is a pretty darned sleep slope? san francisco. 25% grade is nothing i would ride my bicycle up.

>> supervisor, we can investigate this 25 degrees versus 25%. >> supervisor peskin: all right. madame chair, in the interest of getting this right, i would ask for a one-week continuance and we will work with the department of building inspection. i would assume in so far as they have engineers and architects and builders on this that they would have caught this. but we will take one week off and talk about it again in a week. >> supervisor tang: all right. thank you. supervisor kim? >> supervisor kim: i will wait until next week. >> supervisor peskin: and just clarification on the amendment, that would be great. >> supervisor tang: all right. supervisor safai. >> supervisor safai: want to thank the department for being here. but it would be good, mr.

lowery, if you bring someone with technical experience so we can have a little more pointed conversation about that. that would be helpful. next time. thank you. >> supervisor tang: okay. thank you. so, can we get a motion on first the amendment and then the continuance? >> supervisor safai: i make a motion to accept the amendment as proposed. >> supervisor tang: okay. without objection. >> supervisor safai: and then i make a motion to continue this item to the call of the chair. >> supervisor peskin: about one week. >> supervisor safai: one week. >> supervisor tang: we can do that without objection. thank you very much. all right. madam clerk, can we please call item 3. [reading item #3] >> supervisor tang: thank you. again we have supervisor peskin as sponsor. >> supervisor peskin: thank you. the ordinance before you today extends the term of lower polk alcohol restriction.

it was established by my predecessors in 2013 to address the influx of new bars in the lower polk neighborhood and the community's desire to maintain a healthy balance of uses in that area. i want to give credit and acknowledgment to the stewardship of the lower polk neighbors which has been working with businesses and residents on this matter. you will note that it includes one clarification having to do specifically with the demolition of a building at 1331 polk street which currently houses the hemlock tavern and i'm informed the developer have agreed to allow this institution returned to the building once it's reconstructed. so, this makes an exception and to that end, i have one small

amendment, which is to use the word "submitted" rather than "approved" prior to january 1, 2018, which again is for the hemlock tavern provision. and i will pass that out. i want to thank the planning department staff, mr. star, and the commission for their work and the commission's unanimous vote to recommend this to the board of supervisors. >> supervisor tang: thank you supervisor peskin. any questions, comments from colleagues? seeing none. public comment is open. aaron starr from the planning department. >> thank you. aaron starr. i'm just here to let you know the planning commission wanted to adopt it. the proposed modifications include we placing the one year

abandonment period to one year. it is a new exception to the abandonment provision can be used and revice the ordinance so the footnote specifically identify lower polk street. we understand the supervisor is proposing these amendments for you today and we would like to thank the supervisor for doing that. and that concludes my presentation. >> supervisor tang: thank you, mr. star. okay. so now we will go to public comment. any comments on item 3, please come up. >> good afternoon. i will be very brief. the restricted use district is working as noted in the staff report by planning. i would like to thank supervisor peskin for working with lower polk neighbors on this. i would like to thank the developer for working with hemlock tavern and for all the parties for working on the

hemlock tavern accommodation in this ordinance. and i will see the rest of my time for your long afternoon. thank you. >> supervisor tang: thank you very much. any other members of the public who wish to comment? seeing none, public comment is closed. colleagues can we go to motion item 3. >> supervisor peskin: can you take the amendment? >> supervisor kim: i make the motion to make the amendments. >> supervisor tang: okay. we will do that without objection. >> supervisor kim: and make a motion to move this forward with recommendation to the full board. >> supervisor tang: we will do that as amended. thank you. madam clerk, item 4 please. [reading item #4] >> supervisor tang: thank you. once again we have supervisor peskin up. >> supervisor peskin: thank you, madame chair, colleagues. the item before you today is