thank you for your patience we had a joint hearing with the building inspection commission earlier today. please be advised that the commission does not tolerate any o outbursts of any kind. if you could silence your mobile enti devices and when speaking before the commission if you care to, do stern for the record. [ roll call ] >> commission president hillis will be absent. first on the agenda items for

continuean continueance. case at 160 caselli avenue. proposed for continuance to may 10, 2018. i have no speaker cards. >> would any member of the public care to comment on this it item? s >> commissioner mo? >> i move to -- >> second. item 1 to may 10. [ roll call ] >> motion passes unanimously 6-0 and places under condition

matte matters. it item 2. march 222018 and march 29, 2018. >> commissioner -- commissioner moo moore? >> i did not press a button. >> commissioner richards. >> we do need to request. >> would any member of the public care to comment on the draft minutes? >> commissioner richards. >> move to approve. >> second. >> thank you to adopt the minutes for march 22 and march 29 of this year. [ roll call ] >> so moved. commissioners that motion passes unanimo unanimously. and places line item 3. commission comments questions. >> commissioner richards. >> it's been a busy week as

commissioner johnson said news wise. we weren't here last week. i hope the department and the keeping with what we were talking about would reanalyze the amendments to the bill it's good know the impact of the city and it's fair to evolve what the amendments are to understand what they are and how they impact us. the other than is while we were away there was this article, portals of the past. an interesting anything the con corr call for the bay area section. last week the title was lively [ indiscernible ] i don't know any red it. -- read it. there's few places left to bury anybody. paragraph in the lengthy battle whether to exconsume everyboexs everybody and. people that wanted the cemeteri cemeteries weremoved are recent

arrivals that have no respect for the people. this is 2018 and we have -- we can't change anything. there's a lot of parallels and the growth of san francisco what is happening today as we continue to grow. and lastly. we talked about construction costs and their impact on ability of building or have a [ indiscernible ]ing th interes ross had a call on immunity platform on chase center. warriors arena? i guess. i'm not up on my branding. $33 million dolla$33 million. 166 dolla$166 a foot. they are worried nobody willed by on it because there's not -- bid on it. i think that says -- that's comment that says a lot of what is going on in terms of the scarcity and ability to put projects through because there's not enough workers to do it.

thanks. >> if nothing firster we can move on to item 4. >> good afternoon. the only announcement was to let the commissioners know that we are in fact looking at the, i think the third version of sba 5 sba25. weav we're having a hearing on the 6 26 26th. you will receive memo in next week's packet. ask if there's anything in particular you are interested let us know so we can include it in time for the packet next week. thanks. >> commissioner richards>> i thinkin think i mentioned this. the interplay of the different laws and their ability to aplll local control those are concerns of mine. talking you have maybe two law ace applied to the same project. >> item 5. review of past events of board

of supervisors. there was nothing of interest and there was no historic preservation commission yesterday. >> aaron star [ indiscernible ] this report covers two weeks since you were on break last week. they didn't have any planning related items. this week the community considered a resolution on san francisco biodiversity policy sponsored by fewer and kim. the resolution focused on eff t efforts of 35 years of disconnected policy work sported by -- diversity and elevate issues to a city wide prorate and -- operator. and>> san francisco planning staff has been engamed in the effort and reviewed the language. ten people spoke during public comments. including representatives from the sierra club and literacy for

environmental justice. the port. and the public library also spoke in support of the resolution and the inner agency collaboration co-led by san francisco fire and planning. the community members added one amendment from survivor. to -- supervisor. on city owned land. supervisor kim also raised questions from their constituents whether or not the biodiversity would increase conflicts with public access and pesticide and herbicide use. director rafael and the san francisco environment integrated pest management responded to concerns and clarified that the resolution does not impact areas or ordnance. in the end the committee passed the resolution and sent it to the full poored. at the -- full board last week

[ indiscernible ] 16carmalita street was adopted. developing agreements. passed their first read and a resolution urges amendments to california senate state bill 827 sponsored by senator weiner was ado adopted. and the appeal for 4590 lee land was continued to this week. the full board this week, the 2 van project received the second read and off to the mayor for a signature and the 590 lee land environmental appeal was continued to april 16th. last week tlerp two zbruinterrun of note. the first one from supervisor , sfaie. to allow catering as accessories to limited restaurants. and we have an ordnance that would prohibit canvas retail and medical cannabis retail.

[ indiscernible ] so you all will have a fun time with that one in a few months. that concludes my prisonation. -- presentation. >> thank you. commissi commissioner. i watched the board of supervisors hearing on isb827. there were two votes. can you explain>> one was to add an amendment it to it and the final vote was to recommend it. or to adopt it. >> and the amendment was to -- >> soften some of the language. i don't have the exact amendment but i can find it for you. >> i know maybe when you do will be public comment you can mention it. >> thank you. >> seeing nothing further we can go to general public comment at this time. members of the public may address the commission of demit within the [ indiscernible ]

with respect to agenda items your opportunity address the commission will be afford when had the >> reporteitem is reached. up to 'three minutes i have no speaker cards. >> mr. davis? >> good afternoon. david on behalf of the san francisco housing. what happened at the board of supervisors is that out of the land use commission there was a vote to change supervisor peskin's opposition letter to aask senator weiner to amend. sb8 sb827. out of land use a recommend -- amendmented recommend occasicam. supervisor said i don't want to move forward with an amend letter. i want to move forward with an opposition letter.

the first vote of the board of supervisors was to amend the amend letter to an opposition letter and the second vote was to whether to approve the opposition letter. so that -- that's where -- that's where. so the other thing i want to take the time. as we've been talking about sb827 was amended this week and i just wanted to give a couple of highlights not getting into details. but a couple of things that changed is that it established inclutch ordinary rules for any -- inclusionary rules using using sb827 that does not have an inclusionary role. so you would not be able to use it. it has stroerng demolition crueltiontrols mainly [ indiscernible ] it could not be demolished and for is b827. the height restrictions they were moved to 85 foot now just 45 feet and 55 feet. what that really means the san

francisco that the most any area would be up zoned ten feet. i think the most interestingly is there's a delay until 2021. giving local jurisdictions the opportunity do this themselves until 2021 and if it's not done then sb827 and then also there was another big event that happened this week. 17 national housing rights advocates and civil rights advocates endorsed is b827 and it got hidden in a lot of the other things going on. one of those people who did endorse it was richard roth ste stein. who is the author the book called color of leaw or the colr of law forgotten history how our government segue segment gated america. blo his day job a senior

[ indiscernible ] as a thorough good marshal institute and as the hands institute of berkeley. a significant endorsement in my mi mind. thank you. >> laura clark. following up on what todd said about dens doments that come in for sb827. one of the largest orangganizats of nonprofit affordable housing developers in the state has endorsed sb827. they are excited about how much affordable housing this is going to mean statewide. they are going to get to build as well as others. i will be sending all of you the letter from the fair housing advocates as well as the none [ indiscernible ] of northern

california. these are significantan endorsements of a powerful piece of legislation that is going to right a lot of historic wrongs. additionally it's worth noting that there are other places like minneapolis that are considering up zoning everything to four mre-xs throughout their -- pluckss throughout their city. if san francisco wants to hold on on that we can up zone then it needs to get serious about that. that we could do something here in this city. we could get rid of single family home only zoning. this body has the ability to make those decisions. it seems to me that no one has up zoned gary boulevard. we've talked about it a lot with it hasn't happened. while i respect that we might like our local perharograms it doesn't seem to be happening at the pace that it needs to thank

you. >> nothing further we can move on the regular calendar. case 2018-000811cua. a conditionally use authorizati authorization. >> good afternoon planning commission. i'm ellis moskyi the item is a request for conditional use authorization to establish a homeless shelter within service -- social service use at a vacant property at 125 b bayshore boulevard. and 100 barn veld it has two addresses. the city is required to open none fewer than six navigation centers. owned or operated by the city and count of san francisco. the proposed navigation center would be 24,000 square feet and

provide 128 shelter beds community rooms, laundry, storage and open space for use by the residents. and work space officials service providers and the navigation center staff to provide counseling service and meals. tenant improvements to the office building and warehouse. construction of 1600 square foot deck and the placement of two trailers containing shower nah faa silties on site. it would operate for four years for the construction and removal of the facility after which the site would return to it's prior use. the project requires producti-- repair zoning district be. to date the planning department received two communications from two neighborhood businesses. in opposition to the project

with darns a nearby homeless shelter my affect their patronage, trash and crime. in addition the department received letters of support from a neighborhood business owner and the san francisco bicycle coalition. which believes the navigation center and it's mission will help a number of people off the street and benefit the community in the neighborhood. the department of momentsle momentslessness -- homelessness and presented at the board of supervisors budget and finance hearing and the bayview hunter's point advisory committee. in summary the department finds the project to be necessary desirable and compatible for the preen surrounding neighborhood for the following. a navigation center for 128 homeless -- sheltie -- shelter bed. health, mental health and intense i have case management

to assist people into permit or -- permanent or temp house. ing it would be op realtyed by -- operated by the city. and partnership with the community based nonprofit. the homeless shelter would be a temporary use of no more than four years and no permanent loss of pdr space and the project would not intdisplays any exist business or public. this includes the presentation. thank you. >> thank you. >>vy two speaker cards. >> peggy house and dale see m r moor. >> was there a project sponsor? sorry. >> good afternoon i'm with the homeless and supportive housing. i have slides to share with you.

>> i wanted to join you to share detail about the project and address any questions as ellis said we have plans to make 125 bay sure a navigation center. . this will be our sixth. there are four currently open and one currently open under the department of public health. as you are well aware san francisco faces a homeless crisis in our community. on any given night we estimate there are 7,500 people experiencing homelessness in our community and 4300 are living unshelter unsheltered. as stated in this slide deck we have about 1200 regular shelter beds available any given night and 355 navigation center beds. there are currently 1100 people on our shelter waiting list. the board of supervisors in february passed an emergency

ordnance declaring a state of emergency around homelessness and encouraging us to move qui k quickly and giving us tools to move quickly to open these si s sites. so for those unfamiliar with a navigation center. it's similar to a shrillelter a residential facility and more a service intensive environment. we have learned from people on the streets who may not have wanted to go to a shallelter traditionally as well as people liveing in shelter that there are things that could be impr e improved. pets, partners and possessions are things that navigation centers are known for. we told people -- we don't tell people to get rid of their stuff before they come. they can come with their pets, and partners. treating them with the utmost respect in the environment in which we're serving them. i they'ink navigation center

though thoughts. high staffing ratios. high case management support and the bevelled facility -- beautiful facilitiaefacilities. >> i'm not going to go through each of these slides. wanted to point out this this site, part of the thousand person project that mara lee charged us. they came to our staff meet meeting and said you need to get 1,000 more people off the stree streets. 1,000 more than you have already served and get to it. that type of leadership and charge made a difference and we have a number of projects in the pipe throne help us that goal. as well as the pending navigation centers division circle. your slides have some floor plans from 125 bayshore and

julie lalowi can answer construction related questions for you guys. the focus -- the initial focus for the center will be the surrounding areas. and we know that there's traditionally a large encampment at the hairball and encampments in the area where d9 and 10 come togeth together. that it will will be the initia priority for this site. some specifics about the operations of the navigation center. 24-hour staffing and 24-hour come and go and that means there's never a line. there's no reason for somethibo to wait outside of a navigation center. they are aq saysed by -- acce accessed byonly. folks on the street are invited. the ultimate is is there going to be a line or loitering out front. there's no need for that. there's ample face out -- space.

which does help aleave that pressure on the -- aleave that pressure on the neighborhood. 24 hour activation lighting. pictures on slide 15 that shows what the outside will look like after public works is done with their work and i think it will really be a benefit to the community. as mentioned before navigation centers include dorms, bathro s bathrooms, showers, laundry. client storage and social service space all which will be on site. you can see there's -- in this slide 11, 12, more images of what the navigation center is planning to look like. as well as great image of some of the art that we're looking to have on the outside which is slide 15. slide 13 shows a before and

after picture of an encampment resoluti resolution. navigation centers are an important tool for us to resolve street homelessness and encampmen encampments. we make a genuine offer and safe place to go and that are these cente centers. we really rely on them in order to do our work bringing people off the streets. the last part of the slides, which i won't read to you. describes our good neighbor policy and how we and our nonprofit contractor work with the neighborhood around us. i'm happy to take comquestions. >> thank you. >> thank you. >> with that we will hear from the public. peg by house. dale seamoor and other members? feel free to line up and come up when you're read. >> i'm dale seemoor i [ indiscernible ] upstairs.

i want to correct one statement that emily made that the navigation center is a tool. navigation center is a whole tool kit. an all around step up for homele homelessness. i spent 18 years in the city of san francisco homeless shelter system. i moved from there to an sro. and then supported housing and now i have my own home. it is a step up. a necessary step up. and we need about 35 of these. so i'm not only speaking for tun but i'm speaking for the next 34 that will come before you in the next few years. some of the existing ones we have now will retire and we'll need to think about placing other sites in. if you have any quell pals around this. come out. one of my -- at 6:00 and 7:00 in the morning. come to one of those. come out to one of those. if you think, if you have any

idea that we may not need this or another one, come out to one of those. see the look on these people's fac faces. the look is, where am i going? what am i going do? do you know with we have four people over 90 years old sle sleeping on the streets? this is san francisco, california. we've got to do better and it starts now. you i now you have to approve this. i know i am speaking to the quire i will not -- i have been before this microphone beforepy i will prematurely thank you for your consideration and remember there's about 34 more coming. thank you. >> thank you. next speaker. >> thank you for allowing me to speak today. my mother's parents joe and

margaret bought a house in the early 1930s. i was raised there my mother still lives there. we've been here a long time. i own and operate a small bast business at 2390 gerald across the street from the proposed project. i didn't know about it until i got a letter in the mail. our company pays payroll and gross receipts. property tax business licensing fees. waste and management registration fees to the city of san francisco. my team starts at 3:00 preparing the finest seafood to be delivered to businesses in the bay area. all of us must come to work and park on the street in public parking. in the more than 30 years i've been in business. the parking issue has never been easy. with the increase and population of mobile homes it's noearly impossible. in the last five years the

homeless population that hhas ed around the streets of our business. california the home of 25% of the country's total homeless population. they have become a hardship, a health hazard and a problem to [ indiscernible ] making it dich difficult to do business in our current location. the mobile homes and vehicles monopolize parking the garbage is discarded -- the defecation on the street is not from dogs as my video cap pcameras prove. there's also further impact that you're planning which is [ indiscernible ] which will take all the parking away from the front of our business. with this project i am leaded to believe that the working people, the taxpayers have no consideration in the eyes of the city. the conversation cannot just be about homeless sense citizens. we must including the working

tax paying citizens in this conversati conversation. we support the economy. with all this said, i have questio questions. what consideration have been made for the businesses in the area specifically parking, public safety and public cleanline cleanliness? it's a very central area. -- traditional area. there's lots of trucks. we have 18 vehicles coming and going all day. with this i close from an author a profess feastser of public policy. you can't ignore the plight of ordinary working people at the same time that you're asking voters to open their hearts to immigrants and other claimants for social justice. it's asking tobaco many of the people whose living standards. >> thank you.

>> housing human beings is more important than park. . i will say that again. housing human beings is more important than parking. i think this body needs to embody that decision every day and every decision that you make housing human beings is more important than parking. 70% almost of our homeless population were housed in san francisco before becoming homele homeless. these are our people that we have failed through a series of poor public policy decisions. we cannot continue to fail them. what i actually wanted to speak about was if we continue to force navigation centers to require cus and a lot of other process that has been put on the them, we will continue to only

see navigation centers in former industrial areas and low income areas where people will fight less and we will continue to not have every district do their fair share to how is our homeless palmlation. and we need to think about how process enables people to keep the needy out of their neighborho neighborhood. so i think you should alwal thi very carefully about reforming the frohse ensure that -- ensure that every district is doing their fair share. thank you. >> thank you. next speaker. >> hi, my name is melody and i'm homele homeless. i live on the street. quite a while ago there was all these homeless people living under the free way which is called the hair ball. those people were being hosed down at 4:00 a.m. and they had

to get all their stuff out dr dripping wet. and this happened resppeatedlre. eventually over time those people were moved out of that area. where did they go? they went to my block. those people are still there. at the beginning of the year all the people on three blocks -- like blanching off of where i stay, issue wiwere swept and pu navigation center and starting monday of this last week, they're all back. on this street. so the navigation centers from what i understand are only a 30 to 9 # 90-day turn around. these naff investigation centers

are only a revolving door. they don't believe -- relieve homele homelessness. hi i've been asking emily cohan today for the numbers of how many people went in to navigation center and of those people when they do a sweep, how many of them exited into permanent housing? because the people that i have spoken with on my block that went into navigation center, bad things happened to them while they were there. and one of the things they wanted to say is that you cannot pay another human being to care about another human being.

and these navigation centers look great on paper, but the people that are back on my block, they don't feel like they were cared about at all. [ bell rings ]>> and there's probably more and i will stop now. and thank you so much for listeni listening. >> thank you. next speaker please? >> resident of south side of [ indiscernible ] since 1987. i'm familiar with this area. i support this navigation center as a part of the solution. it's only a part. staff people in the audience, there's a major problem underneath -- going under the free way. the connection from trail to y

bayshore avenue. goes down. to put it mildly that people pushing their karts -- they're going to go from this area of the mission to this navigation center and there's no sidewalks. it's poorly lit. please, get [ indiscernible ] to call trans and make them light under the freeway because it's cal trance property -- cal trans property. if [ indiscernible ] has to do it to embarrass them, do it. the lighting is a travis city. -- tray viae ci >> you can't see people pushing their carts. we need a navigation center and we need to pay attention to the

ongoing housing problem beyond the navigation center and making this entire area a safe area to walk to. because one of the things i know about all the homeless people, they're pedestrian. people don't drive to a homeless shelter. and so you should take really careful attention. safety issues, pedestrian, ho s homeless people need to have safe walking. i want to end with this just as a plea. i live in this area, i know exactly what this area is because i drive to the post office to my house probably twice a week and this is the route i take. this is an area that needs attenti attention. thank you.

>> thank you. >> any other public comment on this item? >> with that public comment is clo closed. >> commissioner moore. >> vy a couple of questions for you. could you explain to the commission why the operation for the center is only targeted to be six years maximum? >> the operations for this particular site? the legislation that the board of supervisors passed does define the navigation as a temporary program as well as a conditional use permit putting a length of time. we have other sites that will be in operation longer but that's duration for this site. >> i want to put that in the context of two things you said. one is that [ indiscernible ]

had the noble goal of establi establishing a thousand beds. this is a small fraction of a thousand beds. and i do not believe we will be [ indiscernible ] in just a year. which means the retention of facilities should at least try to help reach a target not exceeded but reach it in a manner that centers don't go out of operation while we're struggling to have a deficit of what we're trying to do. the second point i would like to ask about, i mostly had forgotten that the turnaround time as just presented to us is only 30 to 90 days. which makes some people who are not able to really find themselves solutions for their own specific situation, will find themselves back on the stree streets. i find that very alarming

because in the end, not a real net reduction but a recycling. do you have a percentage refl t reflecting on the severity of where we are. what is the perch of people -- percentage of people who you are able to successfully return to living in the community under different conditions and. >> thank you for asking that question. i can clarify. so first i wanted to put out another number. when we go and we do resolve an encampment we have between 65 and 70% take up rate. the 60% living accept the offer of the navigation center bed. that begs the needs for shelter be beds. once folks are inside. vy data here. arab about -- sorry.

about 14% of all the people who have been in the navigation centers are currently there. right now. and are receiving services. 54% have exis itted to housing or another residential facility. 54% have had positive exits into the community. in terms of how long people can stay and what kind of beds there are. there are four types of navigation center beds. we have a couple of beds in the syst system for folks who are using the homeward bound program. they will only stay one or two nigh nights. the this is our transportation and family reunification program. so if someone is traveling home to another part of the country and needs to stay for a night we receive a few -- reserve a few beds for that. additionally we have a handful of beds for emergency beds. there's beds the police can

bring people to anotht night. if the shelter is full they can bring them there. that's a small carve out of the be beds. half are pathway to housing be s beds. people who are considered we call priority one for housing. most vulnerable and longest term folks in the community. they can stay in a navigation center until we're able to place them in supportive housing. there's not a time limit for people on the pathway to housing bed who we prioritize because of their risk. we will allow them at the navigation center until we're able to make that placement. for other folks who dot da not have a direct pathway to housing meaning they're not part of the most -- we have a generally 60-day length of stay to ensure

we are able to offer a bed and break from the street to somebody else experiencing homele homelessness. we try to make shelter reservations foe f theose folks -- for those folks so there's another option for them to stay. we also know with 7500 people expensing homelessness on any given night, 350 -- 355 navigation center beds and 212 shelter beds. it's so important for everyone here who spoke to have the housing exits. these will be successful if we have places for people to go. and that is certainly part of the of the equations and larger plan. >> will you tie that question back to my first point? what is your idea about the four to six year limit? to create the navigation center requires planning, a sensitive

set up. why six years only? why can these particular facilities not be designed with some slightly more open in the future. >> so because of the challenge with finding space to have a navigation center and challenges in siting and opening. we have employed a strategy of using interim sites. sites is that have another use out of the -- down the road. our first navigation is at 1950 mission street which will be developed into family affordable hou housing. . that's what we want for this site. we took an opportunity use it in the interim. a temporary use of the site until the developers able to begin. this is predevelopment site. civic center hotel. three of our existing four navigation centers. are interim uses of existing

sites that have other purposes and we're trying to make the best of a bad chusituation in ts of finding space. we have two navigation ne'er centers on cal trans property where we hope to have a longer durati duration. the cost of setting up and the need, we know that the longer we can operate these the better. we are trying to work within the confines of the navigation center legislation as well as the available. >> the last point is pedestrian safety walk ability, public that is not basically a marginal temporary site something that speaks to all of us needing safe passa passage. is there any ability to get bud or cal trans or csomebody involved. it's in the interest of all to not just send out ambulances to pick up injured people but

provide something as the navigation center becomes a positive step in order to deal with a larger issue as a positive action rather than a temporary, i'll park you there, done. i like to see nah that this commission sports and -- supporsupreme courts mak-- at least the minimm >> the setting provided by the sites can work. >> definitely. >> i don't know if this is something that public works can speak to in terms of the site to enhance safety. it's outside the scope of us the operator and funder of the site. >> good afternoon, commissi commissioners. what we do on every site is we actually increase the fire and life safety conditions of the site particularly on this one by adding sprinkles and having fire rated walls.

in terms of also, we have out door activity areas for the clients so they are enticed to stay, hang out, have activities. they also have a lot of support services. so the intent is that they don't go outside as much. they can go in and out. there's no curfew. but the intent is to make it an out door living room. they don't really loiter around the outside. and there's staff 24-7. >> i'm not talking about loiteri loitering. i'm talking about a safe passenger. -- passage. if somebody comes later for them to return with reasonable ambient lighting. that you're doing everything on the site that is my question. >> yes. we have increased lighting around. ov overheadlighting over the out door area. there's a gate and cameras and

they can come in and out by b z buzzing to get in and out. >> i'm talking about street escape improvements. [ captioner transition

. >> and i think part of the reason for that is just because of access and the very issues that are being raised by access and truck movements and all that kind of stuff, but everybody else, they are as of right. >> vice president melgar: commissioner johnson? >> commissioner johnson: thank you for saying that, because i think the first speaker has it right. we have to do better by our neighbors, and the people that are experiencing homelessness and going through these navigation centers are and were and will continue to be our neighbors. and our navigation centers are a great step, and something that we should be proud of, but it's just the beginning step. i hope we get 35 navigation centers throughout the city,

but it's part of a larger system, and we need step-up housing all along the way. and while we don't necessarily provide the services provided to people experiencing homelessness, we do play a role in the conditions that allow for more navigation centers to be built and more step-up housing so people can find their way home. so i'm really glad that we're engaged in this community discussion, and i want us to continue to just think about the role that we play in making sure that folks can take that next step from navigation centers forward. >> vice president melgar: commissioner moore? >> commissioner moore: i think i see the commission in complete agreement. i move to approve. >> second. >> vice president melgar: i was just going to say, if i may, so i work a block away from the temporary shelter on south vanness and 26th, and the discussion when that opened last year, particularly from

the businesses surrounding it was similar to what i heard from miss howe, so i wanted to acknowledge that i heard those concerns. so i worked for a nonprofit business a block away, and i can tell you that things are 100% better since that facility was opened. with all of the issues that i listed, the garbage, you know, public urination, defecation. you know, things are cleaner, they're better. even the parking issues, they're better. so i think that it would be great that if at some point, the department could have some quantifiable data to share with the public about these things because i've seen that, you know, and it would be a great reassurance to the businesses surrounding these navigation centers to have some, you know, quantifiable data to point to, so thank you. >> clerk: if there's nothing

further, commissioners, there's a motion that's been seconded to approve this with conditions. on that motion -- [ roll call. ] >> clerk: so moved, commissioners. that motion passes unanimously 6-0. commissioners, that'll place us on item 7, 8-a, b, c, d, and e for case numbers 2011.1356 e, m, t, z, and u for the central soma plan environmental impact report, ceqa amendments, planning and building code amendments, zoning map amendments and implementation program respectively for central soma. i will advise those members of the public that due to a noticing error, the action items for 8-a through e cannot

be considered today, and my understanding is that there will be a request from staff to continue these items, including the certification of the final environmental impact report to may 10th. however, the planning commission will accept public testimony on this matter as a general topic of conversation. >> thank you. steve wertheim, planning department staff. we're obviously disappointed not to be able to hold the hearing today. we have t we -- because a couple of you are not going to be here, we greed agreed to do the hearing on april 9th. pretty big stuff, but we apologize you won't be here to hear the stuff. mayor farrell --

[ inaudible ] >> -- thus maximizing the housing analyzed on the environmental impact report. self-included minor and technical corrections that were all identified in your packet next week as well as the clinical and zoning issues included last week. supervisor peskin facilitated a measure that would introduce the land swap at 4239 bryant street and located most visibly at the intersection of cesar chavez and 18th streets. [ inaudible ] second, we put under city ownership the preferred site of the temporary flower mart, which the site appears being relegated to being the backup site. so that's happened since last we met.

moving forward we're going to use this additional met to review the bevy of input that we received as well as any other issues that continue to surface so we can have a more complete packet for you at that time. additionally two additional items included for april 26, we'll now be considered may 10th. we have planning code language related to this community facilities district, and also the ordinance proposing housing sustainability district in central soma. that being said we'll probably still have an informational on the housing prablt sustainability district and really focus in on that proposal. that concludes my presentation. i would ask that you continue the certification of the eir until may 10th, and then all the other items are informational until then. thank you. >> vice president melgar: thank you, mr. wertheim. with that, we will take some public comment. i have several speaker cards.

mr. grisso, mike grisse, eileen, coco, scott feeney, laura clark, laura winsler, and then anyone else who wants to speak, please lineup. >> good afternoon, vice president, commissioners. although you're not voting today, i would like to provide you with a quick update on the flower mart project. i am pleased to report that responding from requests from both mayor farrell and supervisor peskin, we have proposed the site at 200 market

street in the bayview. you may recall that kilroy has always been open to using 2000 marin as an available site. it's currently owned by tishman spire which has not been willing to meet into a negotiation for the site. if this swap is expected before the end of this year, then 2000 marin will become available and both supervisor peskin and mayor farrell have pledged to ensure that kilroy can then lease 2000 marin for the temporary flower market. kbf this switch can happen, tishman spire is requesting that it receive branding for

its spot at 598 brandon. as you heard from mr. wertheim. we need to keep a back up site in case 2000 marin is not available within the time frame in which it is needed. kilroy committed to providing a temporary site located within san francisco that can accommodate all of the existing vendors during construction. here's 19, 19.5 and 23 is the only site that is available today that meets those requirements. so again, i'm pleased to report that mayor farrell and supervisor peskin have agreed that the piers can remain available as a back up site in the event that 2000 marin does not become available, so kilroy will pursue both options with 2000 marin as the preferred option, and should 2 ishman wish to speed up this process, i will happily go out in the hall and negotiate a lease with karl shannon right now.

commissioners, there are some key details that need to be ironed out, but we believe this compromise benefits everyone involved. we've shared this news with the flower vendors at our meeting this past monday, received some very positive feedback. i want to thank mayor farrell, supervisor peskin, supervisor kim, the staff at oewd for their work on this issue, and i want to thank the planning department staff for all their work on the central soma plan. we are excited to see it move forward on may 10th. thank you very much. >> vice president melgar: thank you, mr. reiskin. that's good news. if the folks that are standing on the seat side could move to the other side, that would be great. >> clerk: the cue is if you're intending to