so the status quo relying on an outdated master agreement that is not paired with a permitting process is flawed. i surgery the board of supervisors to rescind ordinance 190-19 and replace with another process and allows the public to have a say in how the facilities are cited. i support many of the comments made at beginning of the public process and straight forward commonsense items that could be included to help protect the aesthetics and the well-being of san francisco. >> next speaker, please. >> good afternoon, my name is robert johnson. i would like to use my time to highlight the importance of preserving some form of notification in your legislation. you know, it's already tar from a fair fight. the more we allow this to proceed in secrecy, the more trouble we will have.

if you read through board avenue peels against cell phone towers every person there alleges that they were given improper notification. i don't think it's a winning argument because i don't think the board of appeals has overturned a permit on improper notice. i think it's true. verizon in particular has gone to great length to avoid giving notice to people and notice was required to be given to owners or tenants and you have mr.albred here today. verizon's position was they could chose to notify owners or tenants but not both. right. if i have in charge of running a race and i say, person who comes in first or second gets a medal.

i don't ex fact you to chose the person and not give the person a medal. it's unreasonable interpretation. hundreds of permits were issued with this background. so, i just want to highlight we need to have notice. if neighbors don't know what is going on, they can't fight back. when we go to our politicians, they always say, well, you know, you need come up and influence the legislation. we can't do that if we don't know what is going on. i would appreciate if you could keep that in mind. thank you so much. >> thank you, next speaker. >> hello board members. it's the biggest thing and you are requested to stop permitting

pervasively poison usous pollution from unsafe and untested 4g, 5g wireless communications telecommunications facilities. and 5g broadcasting in the city of san francisco. thousand dollars of scientific studies reveal irreversible microwave health and safety dangers. to 9 residents of san francisco. especially children pregnant women, helderly persons in others. the burden of liability weighs heavy on the city. they should have back by insurance policies by the wireless industry in escape clauses in the w.t.f. contracts that they possess. joe moscow wits published an article in scientific american and he advocated an immediate

moratorium on the 5g and demanded our government adopt protecting our health and safety. the 2003 precautionary principle ordinance is a rule of of law that requires per have a len peo protect people and the environment. upon these grounds, it is mandatory to preserve public-health and safety by enacting moratorium begins activation of san francisco wireless telecommunications facilities. you also have the t-mobile versus san francisco case which gives you the trite do this. it's all on your shoulders and i'm sure that you have the right decision. thank you. >> thank you. it's also on our state and federal official's shoulders that they pre-empt our ability. next speaker, please. >> next speaker.

>> >> hello. my name is karen jackson and i'm a student at san francisco state university and i'm here to >> commissioner vaughn : nottati on of the 5g cell phone towers and there's a lot of stuff we don't know about the effects of this kind of technology and what we know is that so many people are sensitive to the type of radiation and i just improper you to wait until we know more. there are multiple countries across the whole entire planet that have banned 5g in their countries and due to not only people sensitivities to this type of radiation but also the fact that the frequency of this radiation can also be harnessed as a crowd-control weapon using frequency of you waves. many people have spoken and told

you what you need to just halt on this and there's nothing more i can say but let's just wait. >> thank you. next speaker, please. >> if you will lineup. >> my name is betsy russellmanning and i compiled a book on 5g is coming. it's here in parts of san francisco. it's coming to our home, our schools, our libraries, our parks and towns and to your children. it's linked to cancer, heart disease, diabetes, alzheimer's, cataracts and immune dysfunction, antibiotic resistance, immune suppression and birth defects. here are there are over 240 scientists around the world who warn about the dangers of these

millimeters waves to all of us. i'll get you a copy of this soon. thank you. >> thank you, ma'am. seeing no other members of the public for public comment, we will close public comment. ms. letswski, do you want to come up? or mr. spits? there we go. i believe supervisor haney has a question for you. you are also welcome to respond to anything that i said or that you have heard in the public or any other things that you as a subject matter expert and regulate or may want to add to this conversation. >> thank you supervisor peskin. >> there was a couple things that came up from the public that i wonder if you can respond

to. one, is sort of this question of the timing of implementation and whether there's some possibility of waiting and there are court decisions coming down and such and what your response is there. the point go notice and who is given notice. it does seem like it would be important to let tenants know and in addition to owners if you can respond to those two things. >> absolutely. so last year, a lot of work was put together to respond to the scc requirement that's we meet the six-day shot clock. it's something all the city departments got together to figure out within the process that we had set in place and with what we need today do in order to allow processing of permits to occur, meet the time lines, go through all the of the different departments for the proper reviews. [please stand by]

>> issues or determination that both the noise and rf emission standards set by the fcc are met. and that the pg&e pole would be posted and within 300 feet, poles would be as well. the public can come out and engage in the public process. if they're interested, through appealing to the board of appeals. so that does remain in the current legislation. >> for the puc and the mta, they have a whole separate thing they do that doesn't have the same noticing process and appeals process. >> public works is no longer overseeing their processes. in the prior legislation, we were issuing permits for all poles, and now they're currently taking and doing all the review related to their assets.

>> okay. so i would for one be delighted in you want to continue to agree to hold off on the adoption of the objective standards. i think first and foremost i don't mean to be cranky on deputy city attorney's debut at the land use committee, but having our deputy city attorney who is the legal subject matter expert, mr. sanders, here, i'm not sure why he's not here, would be very helpful. i do not want to put ms. pearson in the position of having to delve into a body of legal material that is not her subject matter expertise. so i would like to continue to hold off. i would like to continue the hearing and also like to get legal advice about the potential outcomes of litigation three months hence. and at about the same time, the

updated report will be forth coming from our department of public health, which is truly independent of the fcc and the telecommunications industry. so i would like to make a motion to continue this item to the call of the chair. and, colleagues, if we can do that without objection, i will continue to meet with ms. dodd and ms. selby and the advocacy community offline, and i failed to mention brian roberts, and deputy city attorney sanders as we continue to try to figure out what we're going to do with the ordinance this board unanimously passed this year. if we can do that without objection -- i'm sorry? my apologies. that will not be the order until supervisor safai speaks. >> supervisor safai: you pretty much said a lot of what i was

going to say. i do concur with the chair. i would appreciate holding off on implementation. i want to express some of the things i've heard from people in my district. people don't feel like the appeal process is a real process. they feel they submit their concerns. many of them have been expressed today and then everything proceeds as planned anyway. it doesn't feel -- and i understand that we're moving forward with a conversation about standardization of esthetic, i think that's an important thing. i think there needs to be time done to look into the science. we certainly want to get that on the record. but i want to express the overall frustration from some of the folks i've heard from that, the appeals process -- this is not a criticism of dpw, this is the standards by which the appeal is heard and held to. so many times people feel like if they look at some of these

devices and how they're implemented on poles, they one look at one esthetic and there is other ones with a different esthetic. so there is no real standardization. and then proximity and health. for all those reasons, i want to concur with the chair. i think we don't do harm by slowing down the conversation to get all the facts on the table. and in particular, if we were to proceed, then there needs to be a standardization. there needs to be understanding of why some of these are implemented and why the scale is different in size and the esthetic is different depending on where they're implemented. >> supervisor peskin: could you read item number 2? >> item 2 is ordinance amending the planning code during the project approval, by authorizing

the planning department to authorize certain interim activities at project sites as temporary uses up to 36 months and adopting appropriate find its. >> supervisor peskin: mr. star, the floor is yours -- >> audrey, planning department staff. before i talk about the planning department recommendations, i've been asked to share a map to show where the legislation would be applied. if i could get the overhead? so any of the colored areas on the map is where this legislation would apply and i'm happy to answer any questions about that after i present the commission's recommendation. with that, the planning commission heard this item on april 25, 2019. they reviewed a version which i believe has been amended to be more restrictive on the types of

uses allowed under the new temporary use authorization. the version the commission reviewed would allow entertainment, arts and recreation uses. any social service or philanthropic use within a pdr1d district. regardless of use size and permitted in the underlying zoning district. it would also permit any office use so long as the office space is less than 5,000 square feet and equal or greater square footage of space is dedicated for arts, activity uses or light manufacturing uses. i believe the length of the

authorize has been amended, however, the planning commission recommended 36 months with the ability for that tua to be extended up to three separate times for a period of 12 months each. that would be a total of six years. at the april 25th hearing, one person spoke in favor of the ordinance and one urged the commission to find ways to prioritize low equity tenants. they voted to approve the more expansive version of the ordinance i summarized. the first was to amend the requirement to increase residential density. instead only if there is existing residential on the site. they recommended this because it may only exclude many sites from being eligible for this t.u.a. even if the city supports the proposed project, the space

would be of benefit to the city. the project must have a project submitted to the city and if the city determined the project is desirable enough, requiring the project to provide at least one unit of housing on site to be eligible for the tua doesn't make sense. the commission's second recommendation was to clarify that retail under the section that describes the types of uses are allowed, should be restated to say retail sales and service. the eligible uses allowed under this site believe that the retail reference was actually supposed to be in reference to retail sales and service. however, there are retail categories of uses in the planning code that would not be desirable to be an active commercial space such as automobile manufacturing, things like that. i'm happy to answer any additional questions and that

ends the commission's recommendations. thank you. >> thank you. audrey, can you put that map back up? so, i don't think the map is right. >> okay. let me grab my staff report and i can say out loud the districts. >> supervisor peskin: here's what is missing, which is, it says, and neighborhood commercial districts. and i'm just looking at that map of the city and there are neighborhood commercial districts all over, 24 of them, and not a single one is on the map. >> it's neighborhood commercial districts bound within a certain area of streets. so it's neighborhood commercial or neighborhood districts and mixed use districts in the area

bounded by market, 13th, division and king. so soma. otherwise, n.c.t. districts city-wide would be included but not n.c.d., neighborhood commercial versus transit. >> i am not a lawyer. but english is my only language. tom, definitions. so thank you. section 205.5, subsection b, eligible area ends in -- and neighborhood commercial districts. so it's really -- so is that modifying bounded by market 13th, division and king in mixed use and commercial districts, because that is not clear to this lawmaker. if that's the way planning

interprets it, and that's the way you interpret it, or if you think there is clarifying language they should do, so state it now, councillor. >> thank you, supervisor peskin. if there is a lack of clarity, we can make it clear that the n.c.d. district -- all are intended to be covered -- >> supervisor peskin: she's saying they believe that the legislation that they are recommending to us does not intend n.c.d.s, except within the area bounded by market, 13th, do division and king. which is what she just said. >> that's correct. >> supervisor peskin: i wanted to do what she intends. let me state it differently. i can't do what you said, because that would require rereferral to planning commission. she believes that the planning commission is recommending to us

was a narrower thing. and i believe that ms. pearson would advise this body that if you wanted to expand that, you would have to re-refer to planning. so i just want the language to be clear, so we don't get in any weird fights or have to refer to the zoning administrator and have the city attorney tell the zoning administrator that's outside of the zoning administrator powers because legislatively mr. teague doesn't have that. we can massage that language and make it clear. thank you. when i just read it, i was like and -- because it ends with and n.c.d.s. before i call on supervisor haney, planning department mentioned some amendments which is within -- which are on page 6 and are before you which is with regard to the definition of

interim activity. and the way i am suggesting at the behest of a number of individuals who have contacted by office over time, we define those as principally permitted uses. and remove the then extraneous language with regard to the types of uses, because each area sets forth what is principally permitted. so i would like to make those amendments on page 6. and as well on page 6 to add to the definition of eligible development site, the words deemed complete. in other words, that it's not just you submit an application and a fee, but the planning department has to deem that application to be complete and then finally, with regard to the number of extensions and this is

in the provision on page number -- i'll come back to you -- i just want to get these on the table. on page 8, relative to the extension period to limit those not to three for a total of six, for a total of five years. so those would be the recommendations i'd like to make to my colleagues. supervisor haney. >> supervisor haney: thank you for those, chair peskin and your work on this. you know, i am the coauthor of this with mayor breed and we have a number of sites in my district which have been both activated for these types of uses and could be activated for these types of uses especially as we see housing development and it is credible that these

sites are activated for positive use, for art, for events, for small businesses, for different types of light manufacturing. that can take place in a temporary way. i think we've seen -- in this case we've seen the importance of interim use as it comes to navigation centers and homelessness services and this is another important way to activate sites before they are built. one of those sites i know is 10 van ness, which is the old honda dealership and operates as a pop-up event venue and has been incredibly successful at that. so my view on this is that it is smart to more narrowly tailor this to areas where there is a principle many use and i appreciate the piece around shortening the time a bit so this doesn't become -- be a more

permanent use but is clearly an interim use, but just as a general point, it's exciting to me that we are making it easier for the activation of sites particularly ones that can become blight or problematic in various ways. thank you, chair peskin for the amendments. >> supervisor peskin: thank you for your cosponsor ship. >> supervisor safa >> supervisor safai: i want to be clear the version is your amendments? >> supervisor peskin: yes. and those amendments are only on page 6. >> supervisor safai: you added the word, and accepted, on line 4? >> supervisor peskin: on line 4, and accepted, and that appears two more times in the same definition of eligible development site at lines 6, 7 and 11.

>> supervisor safai: got it. >> supervisor peskin: and then what supervisor haney talked about as to the definition of interim activity and page 8 as to the five versus six total years. >> supervisor safai: right. where was the interim activity? >> supervisor peskin: middle of page 6. >> supervisor safai: you said use permitted in the zoning districts? you added that language? >> supervisor peskin: we said everything that is principally permitted is good to go and with that we're able to strike the various definitions of different use types. >> supervisor safai: got it. >> supervisor peskin: any members of the public on item number 2, please come forward. >> hello, supervisors. i am the president of nonplus ultra. thank you for your time today. thank you for hearing this. and supervisor haney, thank you for cosponsoring this with mayor

breed. i'm here in full support of this legislation. nonplus ultraoperates the building that supervisor haney mentioned at 10 van ness street. it is a very cool, old building in san francisco that is entitled or in the process of being entitled for development. rather than it sitting empty, we were able to coordinate some fun events to subsidize the community. this legislation goes beyond just this property, but it goes into whole gamut of different things throughout the city and county of san francisco. the process to get a building entitled is a long and somewhat arduous one in the city. and without activation such as parking garages, this legislation will allow for my

company, other non-profits, some of the folks that are displaced from san francisco, to get into these development projects and really be able to call that place home for that 3-5 year period if this legislation were to pass. it's a significant community benefit because these spaces would otherwise be empty and have no real access to public. again, i'm in full support. thank you for your time. i hope that we can get this passed. >> thank you. next speaker, please. >> good afternoon. my name is el chan. i'm cofounder and 20 year veteran of the events industry here in san francisco. i'm a partner of trademark event productions and we produce corporate events throughout the city and across the country. there is a great shortage of event space in our city and many clients across the country are taking their events to las vegas, los angeles and other

major markets. the interim use spaces here enable us to bring our client's business dollars to san francisco. we have been hosting events over the past decade and saw rejuvenation of neighborhoods in the city. the activity that we engage in brings much needed commerce and vitality to the sites and neighborhoods, including not only millions of dollars of direct event and service industry employment, but also spending dollars in the neighborhoods. in support of the events, we witness the slow but steady turnaround on the streets. we have seen this ourselves in the mission, dog patch and market street areas where the neighborhoods have become more desirable residentially and commercially after a few years with the events and commerce in the area. this fall, interim use space

donated to enable them to host the annual gala raising over $7 million across the globe. the work for this and several events hosted included thousands of labor hours for artists, stage crew and workers throughout the year. as a small business owner, we rely on the reliability of space so we can contribute to the vitality of our city and ever evolving neighborhoods. thank you. >> supervisor peskin: thank you. next speaker, please. >> good afternoon. i'm a native to the bows triangle and resident of the mission district and i worked in events and night life for 17 years in the city. i have come to offer my support for this legislation with the developmental pressures on the city, there are a lot of buildings in the pipeline and i think it's great to be able to use these spaces in the interim,

rather than to leave them inactivated, as it tends to attract blight and yep, so, offering my support. thanks. >> hi, i'm jimmie jenk kins. i'm in support of the legislation as a part-time bartender in the city. i moved here in 32 years. i was involved in the nightclub industry for the past 30 years. being involved with one foot in the white collared world and one foot in the blue collared world has allowed me to stay in the city. it's allowed me to raise my daughter in the city and provide a good standard of living for all of us and our family. and i'd like to see that continue. not only for me. i used to think i was unique, but there is hundreds of

thousands of us in the city that need the additional employment that these places provide. not just for bartenders, but you're talking about security, sound, event planners, everybody that is involved in this industry is affected by this legislation. i'm in strong support of it for those very reasons. you're talking about thousands of jobs, livability and for people to remain and contribute in the city. people don't move here for cornfields, they move here for the vibrancy, to meet like-minded people, other creatives. that's what the type of events we throw provide. thank you. >> thank you, next speaker. >> good afternoon, supervisors, my name is dave peterson, i'm a partner with nonplus ultra. and i'm here to support the legislation. as the need for community and

nonprofit corporate space becomes increasingly scarce in our growing city, it has been my experience how activating these underutilized properties benefits both the community and the neighborhood. as some of the speakers said before me, not only revenue is generated, more revenue is generated from the businesses surrounding these properties, it's also, i think, for optics. i come from a social work background and i'm actively managing the property at 10 south van ness. it's been my duty to work with some of these people that are camped outside of our building on a daily basis, on dark days, when these folks are out there. we allow them to congregate, do what they need to do and feel like they have a sense of security or safety. they're not bothered. we're not aggressive. with this, we've instated a meal program. after each event, our caterers

will come down and feed the folks after the event is over. i'm here to support. >> supervisor peskin: thank you, next speaker, please. if there are any other members of the public, line up to your right, my left. >> hello, i work for the paratransit that is directly to fund. since they moved in -- sorry. since they came in, they been very respectful with our clients, with our disabled clients. they wash their area every time and that helps a lot with the disabled clients. also, with the parking, they're very aware that they can't park in front of the paratransit office, which is very helpful. they do -- we do like them

around because in part we feel safe that there is workers in and out, because that area is pretty, you know, pretty bad. and that makes us a little bit safe. my workers and i feel safe they're there. so, yes, i prove for them. >> supervisor peskin: thank you. seeing no other members of the public for public comment. close comment on public 2. >> supervisor safai: yes, okay. just since i was given this part about the interim activity, just for my own experience, in our district, there was certain things not principally permitted, particularly related to arts, activities and entertainment. i want to ask the planning department, if we strike all this language and just say what is principally permitted, would that constrain anything that has been stricken out of this? because i'm concerned about the arts activities and some of the people here talking about other forms of entertainment. i just want to know if we just

say principally permitted, is anything taken off the table? >> generally yes. some of the uses were called out because they were not principally permitted in the zoning districts where this would apply. sometimes they are. for instance, i believe general entertainment is allowed in the c-3 district even though we called that out here. however, we called it out in the original legislation as a permitted use. there are other things, though, we specifically included or recommended approval of things like light manufacturing and metal working uses in addition to arts activity, because those tend to be more of a worker-artist space and those are not permitted in many districts across the city, including some in this legislation. >> supervisor safai: okay. so i mean --

>> supervisor peskin: it might be helpful to look at the map. and if you want to put the map -- >> supervisor safai: i was going to ask. c-3. off the top of my head. it looks like it's in supervisor haney's -- >> supervisor peskin: you have bunch of c-3. c-3o -- >> c-3p0? >> [laughter] which goes all the downtown core in the south of market all the way up to chinatown. >> some in your district, some in matt's? >> it's in the red on the map. there is the pinkish fuchsia red. all of that is different types of c districts. [please stand by]

>> there's a 15-day right of appeal to the board of appeals. in reality, public notice is quite limited so when i hear from folks on the mission corridors that they don't want the director, plan the director after february to do this and they're still discretional, i felt like we should listen to that. given that the sensitive is entertainment and permitted in all that map that you saw. or a vast majority. >> i hear you and i've heard in those meetings as well in the mission in particular concern i haven't heard about entertainment. i've heard about restaurant uses and expansion of wine and people i haven't heard anyone push back about entertainment. unless entertainment is being

defined differently, how is entertainment being defined here? are we talking about -- >> comedy, music? what are we talking about? >> i have the definition. a retail entertainment arts and recreation use that provides entertainment to the general public including dramatic and music performances where alcohol is not served during performances. arcades that provide 11 or more amusement game devices, bill yard halls, bowling alleys, skating rinks and mini golf when conducted in an enclosed building and adequately soundproofs or insulated so to confine noise to the premises and it goes on. i don't want to speak t to pesk. the only thing i heard was the

proposed pinball. it's something that came up recently in the mission. it was related to a full service restaurant and entertainment. but this is not including alcohol, correct? >> correct. for artistic performance that's did not include alcohol >> for me, i would think why would we want to exclude that. it's not my district. and the office space that we're striking this fee related is related to arts activities so i would say, i mean, at least what we did in our district when we change the table it was completely not permitted. and that was a good youth we could get going in three or four spaces. the only reason i'm reflecting this is the whole vacant storefront tax that we're doing that we're promoteing and the whole conversation about vacancies. >> i have a proposal supervisor

safai. here is one of the problems three of us or any three individuals that serve on any committee of the board have until this moment, we can't talk to each other because it's a brown act violation because any two of us constitute a quorum. but, we've got a little bit of time between now and january 7te send this out of committee, we can talk until january 7th and insofar as this is a narrowing, we could expand this and change the interim use definition which would not have to be rereferred to committee because that is is the way it was originally con trudeau. i'm asking councilor but i believe that to be true so if we were to go back to the original interim definition or do it in part that would be by the referee that is the city

attorney's office to be not substantive amendment if we're to do that on the floor of the full board on january 7th. >> so your proposal is instead of striking everything that was stricken leave it >> i was going to do it the opposite way. talk the amendment and talk about it now between now and the seventh, which gives us >> can we strike everything but the entertainment and the other and also do it so we leave snell we can have that conversation as we go? >> yeah, pearson and tom, which say that if we do that it will take a few minutes to work that because approximate we insert entertainment and arts uses and then say only prince blee permitted, i've been trained by

john give ner to not do things on the supply. if you think can you massage this and you have one suggestion as to the definition that was merely a gra mat tick issue i would take that change now as suggested by commissioner safai. >> supervisor peskin, can you repeat the revisions? >> in addition to the words smithing of n.c.d.s which you can suggest in a minute was everything be permitted except for entertainment as defined and arts as defined which could be prince blee or conditionally permitted, right, isn't that the

defense that we're talking about. i see mr. star nodding his head. >> yeah, just to make sure you are doing general activity and arts is those are the non alcoholic and i would just permitted conditional use or not permitted would be the language. >> so, general entertainment, arts activities could be not permitted or princ principlely permitted. if we say that, you have three weeks to work on it and we'll call that the amendment. >> yeah. >> >> we say it like that you can take the spirit and make it imminent. >> we're trying to be nice and i have to be nice to her on her first day.

so the idea would be to avoid a material change in the sense that the language or the definition of the eligible area would be no less permissive than what's introduced? >> well it depends on which has been introduced. what we are saying is in addition -- so, let's do it like this. there are four amendments, let's dispense with three of them that are very easy and we will leave the fourth one. so is the first amendment which everybody seems to be totally good with is and accepted. >> yes, correct. >> so i will make a motion to have that as previously discussed on page 6 and we will take that without objection. the second one is for a total period of five years and that

seems to be easy and we'll take that without objection. the third one is the wordsmithing one which you will put the ncd clause at the beginning of that sentens, would you like to read that into the record? >> sure. i would be happy to. as amended the definition of eligible area would read means commercial residential downtown residential, d.t.r. and district and this is the relocated clause, in mixed use and neighborhood commercial, and n.c. districts, within the area founded by market street 13th street to division street and king street. >> i think colleague, week take that without objection. that leaves us with the interim

different tee definition. and what is being the use age you are watching being made is that we would mary the original proposal with a hybrid proposal coming out of this committee which is it would be limit today principle blee permitted unless they were general entertainment or arts activities in which case they would be permitted, whether prince plea or uncommitted. >> i'm sorry, i'm not trying to overcome noover com mr. com mrot eligible development site and dedicate forward arts

activities, use or light manufacturing. is light manufacturing needed for c.u. just to be clear. so like manufacturing meeting would depend on the zoning district in which it's taking place in many districts for instance, i believe in the nct -- i don't believe that's permitted at all. >> no manufacturing or industrial uses are allowed in neighbor commercial districts and also no office uses allowed in neighbor commercial districts. including non-profit as well as for profit. we don't distinguish between the two. >> >> if we're saying office space related to arts activity shouldn't we say light manufacturing if in shows areas that have been a priority throughout the city. so we don't miss it in case it came up. she mentioned welding as related

to art but for seeing problems down the road, someone could say i might be like manufacturing that's not real related to art. >> if the use falls under arts activities, so it's like video editing. >> is that why you added that? was it related to arts uses. >> it doesn't read like that. >> light manufacturing is a diffuse. they do have some but it's for arts purposes like stage and scenery and things like that? it's for performing arts not necessarily sculpting. it's food processing, apparel, furniture, fixtures, printing and publishing what their product pottery, glass blowing,

commercial laundry, things like that. with arts activities, it's painting, drawing, sculptures. >> i just want to be clear. to the committee what is the will of the others? >> i might lean towards include tag if it needed a construction,. >> including that. >> we will continue the conversation along with planning and the mayor's office around where we'll end up on this. whether we include this piece right now. >> i would say to leave it and then can you decide as we move forward if you want to take it out. >> that's all. >> that's fine with me. >> and third definition so you know what to do mr. tom. >> you got it?

>> general entertainment. arts, activity, activities use. and light manufacturing or metal working use. so, everything else would be permitted except for those three which could be not mer mighted, conditionally permitted or prince blee permitted. you can take that and we are adjourned until next year. >> clerk: the remaining balance? >> we will take the item as four times amended and send it to the full board with recommendations for hearing on january 7th. have a great holiday.

san francisco is surrounded on three sides by water, the fire boat station is intergal to maritime rescue and preparedness, not only for san francisco, but for all of the bay area. [sirens] >> fire station 35 was built in 1915. so it is over 100 years

old. and helped it, we're going to build fire boat station 35. >> so the finished capital planning committee, i think about three years ago, issued a guidance that all city facilities must exist on sea level rise. >> the station 35, construction cost is approximately $30 million. and the schedule was complicated because of what you call a float. it is being fabricated in china, and will be brought to treasure island, where the building site efficient will be constructed on top of it, and then brought to pier 22 and a half for installation. >> we're looking at late 2020 for final completion of the fire boat float. the historic firehouse will remain on the embarcadero, and we will

still respond out of the historic firehouse with our fire engine, and respond to medical calls and other incidences in the district. >> this totally has to incorporate between three to six feet of sea level rise over the next 100 years. that's what the city's guidance is requiring. it is built on the float, that can move up and down as the water level rises, and sits on four fixed guide piles. so if the seas go up, it can move up and down with that. >> it does have a full range of travel, from low tide to high tide of about 16 feet. so that allows for current tidal movements and sea lisle rises in the coming decades. >> the fire boat station float will also incorporate a ramp for ambulance deployment and access. >> the access ramp is

rigidly connected to the land side, with more of a pivot or hinge connection, and then it is sliding over the top of the float. in that way the ramp can flex up and down like a hinge, and also allow for a slight few inches of lateral motion of the float. both the access ramps, which there is two, and the utility's only flexible connection connecting from the float to the back of the building. so electrical power, water, sewage, it all has flexible connection to the boat. >> high boat station number 35 will provide mooring for three fire boats and one rescue boat. >> currently we're staffed with seven members per day, but the fire department would like to establish a new dedicated marine unit that would be able to respond to multiple incidences. looking into the future, we have not only at&t

park, where we have a lot of kayakers, but we have a lot of developments in the southeast side, including the stadium, and we want to have the ability to respond to any marine or maritime incident along these new developments. >> there are very few designs for people sleeping on the water. we're looking at cruiseships, which are larger structures, several times the size of harbor station 35, but they're the only good reference point. we look to the cruiseship industry who has kind of an index for how much acceleration they were accommodate. >> it is very unique. i don't know that any other fire station built on the water is in the united states. >> the fire boat is a regionalesset tharegional assete

used for water rescue, but we also do environmental cleanup. we have special rigging that we carry that will contain oil spills until an environmental unit can come out. this is a job for us, but it is also a way of life and a lifestyle. we're proud to serve our community. and we're willing to help people in any way we can.

>> hello, good afternoon. i would like to call the meeting of the san francisco public utilities commission to order. may we please have the roll call madam secretary. [roll call] >> thank you. the next item is the apprva