>> good afternoon, welcome to the land use and transportation committee for the san francisco board of supervisors for today, july 13th, 2020. my name is aaron peskin, i'm the chair of the committee joined by vice-chair and safai and member dean preston. our clerk is ms. erika major, ms. major, do you have any announcements? >> clerk: yes. due to the covid-19 health emergency and to protect board members, city employees and the public, the board of supervisors legislation and committee room

are closed. however, members will be participating in the meeting remotely. this precaution is taking to the state wide stay at home order and all local, state and federal orders declaration and directives. committee members will attend the meetings through video conference and participate in the meeting to the same extent as if they were physically present. public comment will be available on each item on this agenda. both channel 26 and they are streaming the number across the screen. each speaker will be allowed two minutes to speak. comments are opportunities to speak during the public comment period are available via phone by calling the number (415)655-0001. again, that number is (415)655-0001. the meeting i.d. is 146 146-474-1769.

146-464-1769. press pound and pound again. when connected, you will hear the meeting discussions but you will be muted and in listening mode only. when your item of interest comes up dial star 3 to be added to the speaker line. best practices are to call from a quiet location, speak clearly and slowly and turn down your tension or radio. alternativesly, you may submit public comment in either of the following ways. e-mail me, the land use and transportation clerk, at erica.ma. and if you submit public comment via e-mail, it will be forwarded to the supervisors and it will be included as part of the official file. items acted upon today are expected to be heard at the board of supervisors agenda on july 21st, unless otherwise stated. >> thank you, ms. major.

could you please read the first item? >> clerk: yes, item number 1 is a resolution renaming willow street to early gage junior street to honor the legacy and impact of the san francisco firefighting community. >> thank you, ms. major. and thank you supervisor preston. this is been before this committee before and thank you for bringing it to fruition. this was appropriate and several decades ago and it's all the more appropriate. >> really pleased we are in the final steps here and what, as you know, is a lengthy process and doing a renaming in san francisco and we are almost there and i have spoken about mr. gage's incredible legacy in this committee and at the full board of the floor. so i will spare you the repeated

history lesson though it is a powerful one. i really am proud to be part of honoring the legacy of earl gates junior, the first black firefighters in san francisco and really i just wanted to, again, thank the san francisco black firefighters association in particular president and bringing this forward and working with us lowly an closel. for the last five months we're engage in community outreach and everyone is excited to move this forward and i appreciate that. my fellow committee members, their support for the original resolution here and we are looking forward to renaming section of willow street between buchanan and laguna. in honor of earl gage junior and

we look forward, hopefully, to a final vote on that tomorrow at our board of supervisors. thank you. >> thank you supervisor preston and i think fire fighter gage would never have believed that legal 798 and the firefighters union would be represented today by a black leader, sean buford, who actually called in at our last discussion on this item so it is remarkably timely. with that supervisor safai, do you have any comments? >> yeah, i just wanted to say something really quickly in between the time that we had this initial conversation just to kind of underscore for both of you, and it will be part of the conversation in the next two weeks. earl gage unio junior was very h part of the consent decree that happened with the fire

department. he was also involved in recruitment and insuring that recruitment and diversity were on the forefront. i called for a hearing that will be at the government audit and oversight committee on the 30th of this month and the purpose of that is to look at diversity and hiring to look the at make up of these departments to see how well they're doing in terms of meeting their diversity goals and we're talking about african americans, we're talking about latinos, asian firefighters, we're talking about lgbtq, women, and about all the different aspects of diversity and how they're all doing. fire, police, sheriff are investigating and making it a priority. i just want to underscore that today. i want to call that out and say that that is something that's also part of his legacy. and we're hopeful that the departments, all of the first responders, will make this a priority in honoring his legacy.

>> thank you supervisor safai and for those who do not know the history of the consent declear, there were two of them. one by federal courts and related to the fire department and the other that related to the police department. that came in a very different era but the discrimination that existed in those times in the 1970s was so legion that the federal courts actually put this city under a consent decree, much has changed but there's much more left to do so thank you supervisor preston for honoring a true pioneer that led to things that he never would have believed, including the leadership of local 797. are there any members of the public that would like to

comment? >> operations is checking to see if there are any callers in queue. >> there are no callers in the queue. >> supervisor peskin: we heard when supervisor preston brought the legislation to initiate. i want to honor and thank all those people and public comment is closed and thank you supervisor preston. your time ising perfect. this was introduced before the murder of george floyd before the active vism we're seeing on our streets but san francisco has a shameful legacy and this is part of making that right and so would you like to make a motion? >> i was going to announce that at full board tomorrow but did

want to let folks who are watching know we're planning with the black firefighters association on wednesday, hopefully with a positive vote tomorrow at the board to to have a gathering online in which we'll talk more about his legacy and a lot of issues that chair peskin and supervisor safai have raised around civil rights and in not just the fire department but in our city so i woulden

invite folks to e-mail us at sfgov.org and we'll make further announcements at the board of meeting with that, i would move to forward this item to the board with recommendations. >> thank you supervisor preston. to the president of the black firefighters association, sherman tillman, who is a with recommendation to the full board of supervisors on that item and a role call please. >> clerk: as stated by supervisor preston, supervisor preston. [roll call]

>> clerk: you have three ayes. >> supervisor peskin: could you read the next item. >> clerk: an ordinance with the administration code to update the city's management requirement to conform to current federal flood plain management and national insurance program criteria. members of the public who wish to provide public comment on this item should call the number (415)655-0001. the meeting i.d. is 146-674-1769. press pound and pound again. if you have not already done so, press star 3 to lineup to speak. a system prompt will indicate that you have raised your hand. >> supervisor peskin: thank you ms. major. we have from, it depends on what you call it, the city administrator's office, mr. brian strong to present this

item that has been kicking around for a long time. we're going to learn about fema, we're going to learn about firm, the floor yours, mr. strong. >> brian, you are on mute. >> got it. can you hear me? thank you, very much. supervisor peskin, and good afternoon supervisor safai and preston as well. this is been going on for 13 years and brian on the chief resilience officer for the city and here i'm also represented jennifer johnson who are is the deputy city administrator who is unable to attend. she's the city's flood administrator and i'm going to share my screen here -- >> i just want to say this is not adverse to you but relative to the city attorney's

legislative digest, the city of san francisco is spelled incorrectly on page 2 and at line 3 under amendments current law and there are definitions repeated and inform tees relatives to the historic preservation definitions that i would like to discuss but after your representation. hopefully people can see the presentation and this is been going on and we participate in this program. part of getting -- when we pass -- when we join the program

fema does produce a flood insurance rate map and now it's our responsibility to accept that rate map and move forward with it. we we don't, we don't get money or insurance from the feds. >> that's right. the reduced rates are the money from the feds. so we must adopt it and i'll give a little bit more of a timeline. the latest that it can be effective would be february of 2021 and that's based on fema's timeline. they've gone out for public comment. appeals process, they've reached the end of the appeals program as well. so, some more background on it. it's a nation wide program. as the supervisor was saying it offers flood insurance and exchange for that sort of reasonably or lower price flood insurance we have to adopt the flood plain management ordinance and the community, we can adopt

more restrictive measures but we cannot be less restrictive than stated for the national flood insurance program. it requires community participation and this is also -- we didn't get to the meat of it, the insurance company's row lie on the firm for their insurance policy ratings and we must use it for managing our flood plain. this shows the timeline so back in 2007, it's when we did the prime minister firm but it wasn't finalized and we did come back with ar ordinance in 2010 and based on input from fema and some follow-up preliminary analysis and they put together a map which was subsequently appealed in 2019 and -- i'm sorry in 2016 it was appealed and a lot of it had to do with the waterfront pier.

>> why was it not finished in my second term? >> when was the second term? >> january 8th of 2009. >> it had to do with the maps being presented. what i would -- the person who would be best able to answer that, if i call on him now, would be chris barclay, who is the western region market leader for acom and he has been our primary consultant on this since the beginning. are you there? >> hold on. >> hold on, chris. whatever happened to brad benson? >> he is still with the city. he is here. we do have rebeca.

>> mr. benson, on behalf of the port -- >> rebeca from the port is here and brad was not able to attend so i'm representing from real estate and development. the information i can provide is similar to what mr. strong was stating, the maps were coming in quite slowly and the process was slow and pretty quickly i think the city and others started to raise some questions about the mapping, which cost fema and their staff to redo those. others may be able to provide a -- i won't call it historic, 10-year-old perspective. >> so can you characterize why the city was pushing back against female? wafema?did fema want to map morn we wanted to map? can you explain that? this is all before a profound change in thinking about the sea level rise. can you explain what happened in

2007 and 2008? >> this is chris barclay -- >> in 2007, fema had a -- >> can you identify yourself? who you are. >> i'm chris barclay, assisting the city with this process of in its relationship with fema and putting together for the flood plain management ordinance. i'm also a resident of san francisco. you've been retained by the city which is the port o.

>> proceed. >> ok. so, in 2007, fema had not completed the analysis. they had an approximate version of their analysis. they had not finished all of the details. they were doing a study of the entire bay. they wanted to provide the city with something the city could use for its initial entry into the nfip so they basically behavioral the city a partially completed analysis and said, you know, use this as you go forward to initiate your participation in the program. subsequent to that, and the city did join the program in 2008, it took fema several more years to provide the fully completed analysis where they had completed the detailed modeling that was necessary to provide all the of the data that they normally put on a flood insurance rate map.

in the middle of that process, they changed contractors a couple of times so all of those things conspired to lengthen the amount of time it took fema to eventually get a fully completed flood insurance rate map which they provided to the city in 2015. so in essence in 2007 it was an incomplete product and they chose not to finalize that at that time. >> it according to my halve, what happened in 2016? >> so, the maps that fema issued in 2015, and the way the process works is they provide a period of comment and they under the law, they must provide a 90-day appeal period for the community and any interested property owners so they initiated that

process that appeal period, in early 2016 and the city, primarily the port, submitted an appeal that was based on the method of analysis that fema was using to analyze the impact of the flooding on the waterfront pier. the port felt that fema was not taken certain factors into that account in that analysis. because of the unusual nature of the circumstances, it took fema a couple years to actually figure out how they wanted to resolve the appeal and it went to the headquarters level so there were a lot of discussions, you know, between the fema regional office producing the maps and the headquarters office about the most appropriate way to resolve the appeal and the resolution ended up being something unique. something fema had not done

previously, in order to reflect the flood hazards associated with the waterfront pier. >> supervisor peskin: can you characterize what the reasons for that appeal was and can you characterize what fema's unique response was? >> sure. so, there were several issues and the most important one was that fema analyzes the way the waves, the way flood hazards are mapped on a shoreline, takes into account such a way that they were not taken into account the way the waves breakdown when they hit the pier, right. so if you can imagine, the ways roll under the pier and the waves breakdown as they hit the pier and fema was still modeling

the wave height. it was presenting a result that would have resulted in a more restrictive flood hazard designation for the piers than the port felt was appropriate. so, the way fema chose to resolve that was they -- i don't mean to get too technical but the fema designated the pier with a higher requirement for flood plain management and it's more restrictive in essence and they came back with what's called zone d, which basically said that the i gues the extente flood has orde hazard on the ree priebus iunnounno one.iunknown..

to your point about sea level rise, the maps don't include the impact but the port is free to manage the development the peer with sea level taken into account if they chose to do so. it gives the part more flexibility in the way it manages to peer. >> relative to the slide it's before us would you like to describe that? >> sure. the blue, this is a map that is constructed on it in essence an aerial photo of the city. the brown area that you see is

the 500 year flood plain and that is not -- that is for informational purposes and it's not the basis for insid flood pn information or insurance. the light blue is the 100 year flood plain the area that is used for insurance rating and is also the area that must be manage with the flood plain management requirements and in this slide, or this is just a piece of the map, there's little area that is actually affected by the 100 year flood plan on land and if you look at the light brown areas which are out on the pier, you can see the ferry building and you can see piers, you know, that's one and three to the left there and. >> and 14 to the right. >> yeah, exactly. you can see the light brown.

that is zone d. that is -- these are the areas that are out over the water and zone d is an area that is possible but undetermined flood hazards. so, you know, the community, the normal nfip don't apply there. the community is free to apply. the require it sees fit of the the only difference is the insurance on those peers is a bit higher than it is in areas that are minimally flood prone. the insurance is higher because the risk is not known but the flood plain management requirements are less restrictive than in the blue 100 year flood plain areas. >> supervisor peskin: can you zoom out and show us the similar shadings, not only in the downtown waterfront area but beyond? >> brian, you've got control of the presentation and maybe you

could see that. that would be aquatic to the west going to pier 39 to the east and you are putting pier 45, abc and d in zone d. and all the boats is in the light blue. proceed. >> go ahead and kroll down, brian, to maybe down to skip over that up and go to the next one. >> no, no, no. >> there's mission bay. >> yeah, so this is mission bay area. and you know, again, the area that -- that brown area, which

is most of mission bay development is in the 500 flood plains so not subject to the ffip flood plain. as part of the appeal i mentioned earlier, the preliminary firm that was issued in 2015 actually had some areas of this shown as being in the 100 year flood plain but the developers there noted they had actually filled those areas so that they were above the level of the 100 year flood and so fema, you know, as part of the appeal resolution, actually revised this area to show the extent of the fill that was placed so that area is no longer shown as being flooded during the 100 year flood and so -- in the lower right corner there, that there are some areas that are sub -- >> and 337 and the project that encompasses that was predicated

on measures to adapt to rising tides and flooding. >> yes. >> the reason that the port made this appeal was at the flexibility to do that -- >> if i may, brian. the impotence was definitely around the piers and the sort of strategic input we provided around the pier structure. we were not concerned with the mission rock development because fema provides a process for w when you are physically altering the property, you can provide them new information that indicates new elevations and so at that will time, back in 2016, we knew that mission rock would be elevating their site and so it wasn't one of the primary drivers, the primary drivers were looking at the pier

structure and having discomfort with the way fema had not acknowledged the way there are structures slowing down the waves. we are gratified that mission rock and also mission bay are now sort of correctly characterized as being in the lesser risk zone than the piers are. >> let's keep moving south. pier 90. >> you can see it's more of the area. this is a little unusual and pardon the way this is presented. these are just pieces of the map and it's two separate maps. there's actually an area on the parameter of that pier that is zone d and because it's pile and and subject to some inundation so that is shown as the 100-year

flood plain. >> if it's over top -- [please stand by]

>> it's an area that -- they don't have a very good way of analyzing that sort of structure. their tools for analyzing coastal flood hazards are somewhat inadequate for the pile supported piers. this is the first place in the country where they have decided to use this approach. it's a bit experimental. they've got a set of tools for constructing these maps and these tools are accessed to an nationwide basis. it's hard to adapt those tools to specifics of the water piers

in san francisco. hunter's point, mostly 500-year floodplain. there's a low lying area that you see in the lower -- or southern part of the former naval base. there are some zone d piers. what's more important to the city is the extent of that 100-year flood plain there that will be filled in when that area is developed. >> i feel with parcels a through f, those low lying areas the southern part that are in blue,

those aren't parcels e and f, those are the contaminated sites, is that correct? >> i'm not sure that i can answer that question. i have not seen the map with the radiological sites in detail. i believe you're right. >> what you're telling me on this map it's subject to massive inundation? >> yeah, that's one of the reasons that the development in that area is so important to be able to protect these areas. >> i did not understand what you just said. but okay. >> the hunters point, the

development going on hunters point, it's with the intent, once we get it cleaned up, which is another issue, getting it cleaned and being able to protect this area from flooding. if i go to treasure island, similarly, we see lot of areas in treasure island that are in the flood zone but would also be protected with the new development that's happening at treasure island. >> majority of the radiologically contaminated sites i'm looking at on this map -- >> which map are you on? treasure island? >> yes. most of it is actually not in the blue area but in the brown and gray areas is where most of

the radium is. hunters point map is much more troublely thatroublely -- troube t.i. map. >> the airport also has a major program to address flooding. but they are also identified on this map. >> that is all around the seawall? >> yes. >> i think at the airport, their efforts or their plan is to expand that flood protection system to eliminate that blue

from the map. right now those features, the flood protection system that is there, is not sufficient to address the 100-year flood. there's not enough free board and there's openings that need to be closed in order to eliminate the floodplain from the airport property. >> right. i do not mean to interrupt your slide mr. strong. if you like to run through it real quick. go for it. >> i think that was actually helpful to get to lot of the questions. we mentioned the deadline, february 2021 is when the map will become effective. chris mentioned that we can't -- this is coastal hazards only. it does not consider sea level

rise. we are using other tools and methods to look at sea level raise. we have a guidance document that we put in place in 2015. it was updated last year. we completed with the planning department a sea level rise vulnerability and consequence analysis that looks at the entire city and identifies the risk related to sea level rise. that work has been happening. we're also working with the p.o.c. with extreme flooding mapping. the flood hazards -- other side of this, p.u.c. is looking at hazards and storm water runoff. i'll show you a better picture of that. we mentioned different areas that are impacted by it. this shows bigger picture what the city look likes with the map

on the left being the new firm. red circle show where there's some overlap with the map on the right and the map on the right is sf p.u.c. flood storm map. that map was put in place two years ago. this is where you see much more of inland flooding. we wanted to make sure that we're think being these things together and not separately. an ordinance measures related to the p.u.c. program are expected to be coming in the next year. >> sarah or brian, so far as we have rare opportunities at the committees to talk about what that looks like, which could be a detroit style buyout program. would you like to tell us what

their plans for the much more expansive blue areas on the map on the right? >> sarah, are you there? >> yes. can everybody hear me? >> we can't see you. >> okay, i'll turn on my camera. we've been working on partnership on both of the flood hazard area to make sure we are moving forward. to your question about the inland areas, we've had a trajectory where our first step was to make sure that the public was aware of the risk. we created -- adopted the map at

the commission level. supervisors with your help, we created the disclosure ordinance to make sure that property owners and landlords would disclose buyers and tenants if they are in the flood zone that you see there. that was the information piece. moving forward, there are lot more rigorous things that we can pursue. one of those is to amend our building code to make sure that new developments and substantial renovations would be above the flood elevation. we are pursuing that work for the inland areas, we'll do that in the way that's parallel what's required in fema so we can have a cohesive citywide understanding for the coastal flood dangers as well as the inland. then beyond that, there are other innovative programs that

we could establish. they are on the list to analyze such as land acquisition, prioritization, studies that we can do as well. our next sort of mid-term target is to work together on building code amendment. >> what's the time frame for that amendment? >> we are hoping that within a year from now, we were thinking that we would finish it within 2020. as covid has delayed us, we're still pushing forward but a bit delayed. we're thinking within the year we will be able to bring that to you all. >> to the two of, where is the third map that overlays various projections of sea level rise on both of these maps?

>> we have that map, that's part of the sea level rise consequence analysis work and the guidance work. essentially, that map is going to be the old shoreline. we don't have it in this presentation. i'm happy to share it with you. it is the old shoreline where it cuts in around the embarcadero and goes back out and cuts in again. >> up to clay street? >> yes. >> that's an excellent point. as we move forward with establishing what the building code amendments would cover. we're also working together with colleagues at the planning department as part of our resilience meetings. as we move forward, see if there are other relevant overlays that need to be included in that. >> just to add to what sarah was

saying, this is why we brought on climate hazard coordinator to make sure the different departments are doing lot of work with sea level rise. we also know there are issues on the west side that are related to sea level rise and to erosion around ocean beach and the zoo and the great highway. we're trying to make sure that we're coordinated on those different fronts. >> the p.u.c.'s plan -- >> yes. >> is there anybody on this call from the p.u.c.? p.u.c. is one of the agencies got its own independent authority under the legislation that's before this committee. >> i'm part of the p.u.c.

>> oh, that's you. >> yes. >> i don't see ocean side plan on here in either side. >> are you referring that from the sea level rise perspective? >> s.l.r. is what will kill that thing as you guys putting huge amount of capital in it. >> to brian's point, we probably should have put a third map on for today's presentation. when we come back for building code, we definitely will compile all of them. today, these two maps are representing flood risk as we understand it right now. some sea level rise is included this 1-year stor 1-year -- 100-m map. we understand that when sea levels are rising, it will

diminish the ability of the water to exit our system. that impact to our infrastructure is included on the map that you see on the right. as you can see, the actual sea level rise on the line that brian was referring to, which will largely mimic the shoreline is not included. we do have another map that looks at that and it also comes close to the southeast treatment plant as well. we're very acutely aware. those factors will definitely not be excluded in our thinking. they're not shown on these two maps because of the criteria that are relevant for the fema piece. >> thank you. to my colleagues, do you have any questions, comments, suggestions?

supervisor safai, supervisor preston? >> no. >> okay. >> supervisor peskin: mr. strong would you like to go through your presentation? >> this is just the last slide here. just to show that, what homeowners and business owners can do if they are in the zone and this is really for new buildings or for substantial improvements where the repair exceeds 50% of the market value of the structure. in those situations, there's some different options where the lowest floor can be one foot above the base foot elevation, making sure that utilities are elevated above the elevation.

you can also use flood resistent material and you can allow the flood to pass through different areas. those are some examples of what people that are building in these areas will need to do. they will need to show that they have other protections so they won't be impacted. i think that's really it. this is a list of the people -- i'm sorry, i meant to start with this -- it shows the different folks that have been working on this closely and that are here for additional questions. i think you covered most of them already. >> can i make one additional

point? the ordinance that the -- board of supervisors has in front of it does not change any of the flood main management -- floodpn management requirements. the they are predicated on the san francisco building code which references the state building code and the state building code includes those requirements that brian just had on the screen. in terms of the regulatory aspect of this, the city is not doing anything new here. it's really the adoption of amended ordinances because the map is going to be finalized.

there's other things that the city is cleaning up about the 2010 ordinance. sound like you have few additional elements. it's not changing from the regulatory perspective. >> thank you mr. barkley. that is clear. i appreciate that. >> supervisor peskin: now let me turn to the subject ordinance before we open this up for public comment. only page 7, there are set of definitions that were in the earlier ordinance that heard in this ordinance starting online 15 of page 7. what is missing from that -- you

have plenty of time to suggest language that includes contributory structures in locally designated historic districts. if you like to come up with language on that, i would appreciate it. i also do not understand, maybe this is just me, why you define flood way twice. that happens at page 7 line 6 and again somewhere on page 9 line 3. statement definition you defined it twice.

that contributory buildings in locally designated historic districts are defined under historic structure. i like to see you suggest amendments for that. with that, why don't we go open up to public comment. >> i'm checking to see if there's any in the queue. we have ten listeners and one person in the queue. >> first speaker please. >> my name is francisco da costa, i was paying attention to this presentation. for the layperson, the areas

that are contaminated. hunters point is very contaminated. the city and county of san

francisco is planning about 20,000 homes right in that area is going to be flooded. we must remember that since earthquake prone, prone knots only to flooding but liquid faction. large areas were claimed. the city hasn't been paying attention to thousands of homes. forget about 100-year flood. if you get some high-rise in between, thousands of homes will be at greatly impacted. again, we need the input from the core of engineers. we need input from hydrologist.

thank you very much. >> supervisor peskin: are there any other members of the public on this item number two? >> that completes the queue. >> supervisor peskin: public comment is now closed. to mr. strong, given the time frames here, how would you feel about my continuing until you come up with the suggestions, although i can make them. we got one or two ways to go. one is that relative to the

definition of historic structures. we instruct the city attorney to develop language that specifically says that contributory buildings in san francisco designated historic districts will be subject to the same, that will be the south end historic district northeast waterfront historic district. maybe some others that are on the map to the right, which could be the historic district. the way it's defined, contributory buildings seem to have been left out. which i believe will be nonsubstantive. or we can continue this to our next meeting or call of the chair until you propose language.

your choice. >> i don't see a problem going in either direction. i think we're fine if you want to make an amendment and bring it back. >> supervisor peskin: then let's err on the side of caution, which is so far we don't have any pending time line, let us continue this to the call of the chair. i will schedule at the next meeting once that language has been developed. that will make the city attorney happy. that will make my colleagues happy. that will be more transparent process. with that, colleagues i like to make a motion to continue this to the call of the chair. mr. strong will work with ms. jensen on the language. roll call please.

[roll call] >> supervisor peskin: , please read item number three. items 3-6 together. [agenda item read]

>> supervisor peskin: thank you ms. major. this item only been kicking around for half of the time that the previous item has been kick around. i was around during the recession. this is a massive rezoning proposal at the really central part of the east side of the city at van ness and market streets. there are some projects that

have been through the rubric. therthere are some that are parf an ambitious plan going down the road. this is where many parts of districts and different neighborhoods come together. district 6, district 5, district 9, the mission, south of market, civic centre, all come together. this is a remarkably complicated proposal based really on creating a new high-rise residential district. that is predicated on public transit. all of this becomes much more interesting and much more uncertain during the period of covid-19 and what none of us, which is how this will roll out in the years and decades from

now as well as shelter-in-place. i want to really thank my colleagues on the board, supervisor preston, haney and ronen who have engaged with community over what their desires are. i really want to thank the community for being a very active part of a very complicated conversation. i want to thank the department of city planning that has evolved overtime to really understand that the rubber hits the road with community and community benefits and we don't do development from the development sake, duo it so that the rising tide will actually raise all votes. >> thank you very much chair

peskin. i'm director of citywide policy for the san francisco planning department. what is before you is the market octavia plan amendment known as the hub i wanted to offer you four thoughts. the first, this plan does what the board what they requested. the board questioned the amount of office in the central area. the hub plan adds housing. it delivers in an area, great transit support. it's intended for high density living. this plan provides an additional 1600 housing units and 400 plus affordable units. that is needed in the midst of housing crises. number two, this plan maintains the commission's discretion and control to maximize community

benefits. this plan ensures that developers wanting extra height come before the commission and pay additional fees. as lily will describe, there are more than $1 billion worth of fees that can be generated to support transit, housing and more. the city could use that money. remember without the plan, the developers can get nearly the same height through the same density bonus block without paying all the plan fees and without commission nor board approval. third, equity. we agree with the community's concerns about the equity. director hillis has committed to continue to work with the community members through and pass this plan adoption. the new either woul -- area will focus o on adjacent neighborhoo. this equity centric work with

include small business working group, public projects, equity assessment guidelines and community facility planning. the planning commission just passed an extremely robust resolution considering the department's work on equity. they are squarely focused on ensuring they see outcomes. the commission also passed this hub plan understanding that the plan delivered equity benefits now and will continue to grow the benefits. lastly number four, this plan works with the recent bill from assembly member two. the plan creates second housing sustainability district in san francisco. this district would streamline projects to provide affordable housing and built with wage waive and skilled trained >> supervisor peskin: ms. rogers

, with all due respect, only thing i learned from this presentation is that i think you just told me that i should have voted against the central general plan. do supervisors preston or safai, would you like to say anything before we go to her? >> i'll wait until after the presentation. >> supervisor peskin: supervisor preston? >> supervisor preston: , same here. >> i will share my screen. today i'll provide a very brief overview of the key points around the market octavia area plan amendment.

today i'll focus on the key points i believe many members of the board and the public are generally familiar with this project. the hub area was included within the boundaries of the market octavia plan and area plan that was adopted in 2008. was area was high density mixed use neighborhood. numerous policies in the plan support this vision including the creation of a especially used district which allows for high density residential development. these controls exist today. the plan also established new fees to fund affordable housing and infrastructure. while the plan set the framework for development, the department did receive many development

applications until about 2012. this is largely due to the recession in 2009. over the course of the last four years, we've engaged in the community planning process to look at the area holistically. we are now in the approval phase. three goals were the initial drivers of this effort. first to increase housing and affordable housing near transit. to look at all of the streets in the area and identify ways to make them safer and to define prioritize how impact fee money can be spent. since we started this project, income inequality has worsened and the response the department has been working around equity. there are number of citywide efforts and neighborhoods specific efforts under way to work with the community and city agency partners to advance racial and social equity. we've also worked with the community on actual ideas that can be incorporated into this legislation to advance racial and social equity in the hub and

we welcome your additional thoughts and ideas on these. there are four pieces of legislation before you. general planned amendment, planning code amendment, zoning amendment and planning code and business and tax regulations amendment to establish the hub housing sustainability district. this was an opportunity to update the general plan for key topic areas to reflect the latest policies of the city. examples include new policy to advance racial and social equity, new policies around climate change and resilience and along around supporting families with children. there are a number of amendments to the planning code that are needed to reflect these proposed policy changes. i'll highlight a few. expanding the area in which money can be spent. new fee to fund community facilities, allowing a land dedication option to provide more affordable housing and in

the adjacent neighborhood. third piece of legislation is the zoning map amendment. this amendment will two things. it will give the public, the department and the commission an avenue for engagement to have say how the build willing look. unlike the state density bonus where additional height is automatic, the new height are not automatic. rather new heights can only be granted at a public hearing by discretionary approval by the planning commission. it also gives the public and the commission some certainty around height by preventing projects from combining the state density bonus with a new height control.

second legislation would create consistent land use control across the area. it responds to the things that the community asked for. more two and three bedroom units to support families. restrictions on retail side and formula retail to support more neighborhoods. less parking. it would create fees to provide more funding for affordable housing, community facilities and infrastructure. to ensure that any project that receive additional height granted by the state density bonus or by the planning commission also pays all area impact fees. the structure of the special use district are not compatible with the current mct3 zoning district. this rezoning is necessary to capture all fees on new development. put legislation together in 2017 to accelerate housing production by howing ministerial approval

of some housing projects. while requiring union labor and on site affordable housing. the hub will be the second in the city. there will be some restrictions on it. it would only be used if the height is 120 feet or lower and for projects that do not seek discretionary approval by the commission. if a project is seeking new height in bulk either by commission approval or by the state density bonus, they cannot be approved. the plannings commission was please to come up with plan to provide $1 billion in public benefits. >> your slides are not going with what you're speaking about. i'm going to actually ask our administrator to pull it up.

what we see is only the first page. >> which page? >> 17. >> i'm not seeing a page number. >> the commission must come up with plan that provides almost a billion dollars in public benefits when it's hard to fund

affordable housing. these dollars will go a long way to improving street and funding housing. base the on these revenue projections, the city will be able to fund new on site units and affordable housing, new and improved parks, funding for child care and school and improvements to transit service and new community facilities. specifically this includes $682 million for new on site units and affordable housing resources. this is more than $600 million affordable housing bond that was passed last year and without any public subsidy. $116 million to improve transit service and capacity including modernization of van ness station. $71 million for street and alley

improvements. this includes improving the major streets to make them safe and comfortable for people walking and biking and funding to create more living alleys. $57 million for child care and school. $32 million for new parks and enhancements to existing open spaces. $7 million for new community facilities in the plan area and the adjacent neighborhood. on a very simple level this project is about allowing for more height on 18 sites and updating the zoning. this could create significant new housing, new affordable housing and revenue for the city. over the last year, the department deepen our conversations with the community and planning commission to

understand how physical changes affect residents. particularly residents of colour. we try to gain a better understanding who benefits and might be burdened by this project and through this effort, we've identified specific legislative changes to advance racial and social equity. the department is committed to continuing this work in the hub and the adjacent neighborhood and across the city. the legislation before you allows for more housing and public benefits, provides an opportunity for all stakeholders to have a voice in shaping future projects and ensures that the city maximizes public benefits. if the legislation is modified to restrict the height on 18 sites or to retain the existing zoning, projects can still get more height under state law. but the public and decision maker would have limited input on the project and the project would not pay full fees to the city.

>> supervisor peskin: that cony presentation. i'm happy to answer any questions. >> supervisor peskin: policymake rs will make policy. but thank you for your slightly political input. supervisor preston. >> supervisor preston: thank you chair peskin. as described in this package of legislation is seeking to rezone about 84 acres in the hub this includes areas of my district, district 5, supervisor haney's district, district 6 and has ripple effects across the city. we're looking at four pieces of legislation that comprise the hub area plan including amendments that's been described

to the general plan to business and tax code, planning code and other related zoning regulations. how tall, how dense, how much residential, how much commercial and very importantly for whom. i think the stakes and chair peskin you described this at the beginning, the stakes here are very high. this aerial plan will really dramatically increase height density potentially traffic and congestion in this central part of the city. as planning staff pointed out, the area also offers significant opportunities to create affordable housing units, secure public realm, improvements and promote public transit and green

mobility. when i look at this project, it's like done right this area really can promote equity in city and done wrong it can exacerbate inequities. i heard from so many community member who have been weighing in on the aerial plan and on the specific development proposals.

there are obviously a lot of moving parts here. i think it's essential that we get this right. i'm not sure about you, colleagues where you stand. i can speak for myself, i can use an opportunity to digest these items further continue speaking with stakeholders and come back to this item for action next week. i intend to move to continue items 3-6 for one week to our next committee hearing on july 20th and we'll make that motion when appropriate. >> thank you supervisor preston. supervisor safai, anything you like to add or subtract? hearing nothing, we can open up to public comment. >> thank you operations checking. we have 14 listeners and two in

queue. >> supervisor peskin: first speaker please. lily, i meant you no ill will. >> i'm not offended. >> supervisor peskin: please proceed. >> this is jason henderson. i'm very familiar with this proposal. i sent some images, some maps over to the supervisors. i hope you can see them. i know this is very tricky. the first map is showing air

pollutant exposure zone. you can see that the entire hub is in there. more people are likely to die with covid-19 with the air pollution factors. we just saw for two almost three months, crisp, clean, clear air in the hub. it all comes from cars and it comes from cars and trucks coming through the hub. the hub plan has its public realm. it's mainly a housing plan. it feels like the sfmta and transportation is kind of a bystander here. this is worrisome with the state of transit with capacity issues with the virus.

the plan acknowledging loading deficit problem with regards to e-commerce. these will be swarmed by delivery vehicles. it's acknowledged that they don't know how to deal with that. if you look at the next map, this area is -- when we start planning for the hub, the growth in t.n.c. expanded rapidly. >> supervisor peskin: this will not come out of your time. i have questions about the map on the screen. i assume that the areas in the darkest colours are the ones that are least served by t.m.c., is that correct? >> the ligh lighter area is leat serve, darker area has more intense drop off and pick up. this is from the sfmta.

we don't know -- the e.i.r. for the hub doesn't elaborate. we put together some proposals to add to the urban realm. i ask that you go to figure 5. one of the big issues post-covid-19 we need to provide safe ways for people to walk and bike from the mission.

it is the right place for housing. it will be great that there will be more affordable housing so essential workers and teachers can live in the city. this is the place for that. what i think that we really need -- >> to the chair, the speaker time has expired. >> supervisor peskin: thank you mr. henderson. are there any other members of the public who like to speak to items 3-6? >> i have 20 listeners and 16 in queue. members of the public who wish to provide public comment, could call --

>> i'm calling to speak in support of the project. [indiscernible]

i like to offer my support for the project. thank you. >> next speaker please. >> what i want to bring to your attention is in this hub, there are some very serious issues with homelessness. not a word about it. how do i propose to address over 10,000 people being homeless? we already had what's happening

in the future with over 510. that's one location. number two, this is our time for reflection with this pandemic. this area and other areas too, should be slow in fostering or encouraging high density housing. number three, this is the land of the learning.

there are ways to accommodate the people who are suffering. we should address that first. there's no way we can be dreaming up making billions of dollars in this area. no way. thank you very much. >> next speaker please. we have 22 listeners and 16 in queue. >> i'm mike chad i'm calling in support of the plan. as supervisor peskin noted this plan incubating for about five years. lot of thought put into this by staff. i would hope that move to approve the plan. as staff has noted, there are

lot of community benefits that will help provide affordable housing. thank you very much. >> good afternoon supervisors. i'm melinda, i'm head of school first american international school at international high school. our school community has been following the development of the hub i'm speaking to express our support for the plan. for the past five years, international school has worked with the city of san francisco to realize vibrant mixed use neighborhood. it will deliver much needed affordable housing, and provide a world class high school campus. despite the uncertainty of the current moment, our school is excited to have the hub legislation and our project move

forward. we raised funds to complete the project. we are san francisco's oldest and largest bilingual school. we bring people together from many backgrounds accounts. we are committed to diversity, equity and cross-cultural communication. for almost 60 years, we've been educating engaged citizens in san francisco. we've been in san francisco since 1962. we have more than 800 families and 200 faculty and staff, patronizing local restaurants and merchants. over hundred families live in the hub itself. we support our faculty and staff with good wages and benefit and we provide six million in financial aid to our students and families every year. that's why we think the hub makes so much since.

this project is exactly the kind of mixed use, mixed income transit oriented development that will serve san francisco well in the future. providing housing, strengthening the pedestrian experience and bringing welcome improvements. i strongly encourage you to support the zoning as soon as possible. thank you. >> i'm a resident of district 5. i've been living here for years. i'm here to express my supporter in the proposed hub rezoning legislation. our daughter, she goes to the french american school. she has been there for the past two years.

we're happy to be part of the french american community. if you have walked the streets in the neighborhood, you know how essential this development is to have rezoning will bring much needed housing and development to this part of town. i'm in support of this development. thank you for your time >> good afternoon supervisors,

cory smith. i'm here to support the plan that you have in front of you today. this is a process that has divide -- provided us the opportunity to add 600 new homes not previously zoned for 25% of the homes will be permanently affordable housing. overall, mentioned earlier, the plan is going to generate additional $235 million. impact fees, fees for open space, transit improvements, child care with a nice chunk of change, $54 million. desperately needed for permanent

affordable subsidized housing we ask that you move the project and the plan today. thank you very much. >> i'm calling to support the

hub plan and urge the board of supervisors to approve it in t. we desperately need more housing, affordable and market rate. this project is a way to accomplish that given how many new homes it will create.

i want to reiterate my strong support and urge the board today to move this over and tray to get housing built as soon as possible. thank you. >> good afternoon. i'm a renter in the mission district and i'm a voter calling today in strong support of the general plan to move forward. according -- urban density does not lead to higher coronavirus infection rate and link to lower covid-19 death rate.

this project reflect community process delivering multiple benefits for all current and future san franciscan and establish market housing rate reduction, the market star everred for market and affordable housing. please move forward with the item and stand by your commitment to finding alternatives for housing supply at all income level. >> members of the public who

wish to provide public comment call the number 415-655 (#41)56. 415-65-5001 -- (#41)565-5001. next speaker please. >> i'm a renter in district fi five. i'm representing our 9000 members. i'm asking you to please support the plan as is and approve it immediately. we need this housing now. we need the jobs now and the tax revenue now. we don't need another five years of study. if you think of the 400 families waiting for below market rate units to move in these homes,

ask them, do you want to wait another five years. all the renters and the housing insecure people of the city are in a rush. they're in rush to find somewhere we can live and raise families. that's why i want you to support the plan. once you support the plan, there aren't enough below market rate units, great. let's go find some more affordable housing. you can't use the excuse of affordable housing to block affordable housing. please get this plan approved. let's get these 400 units below market rate built and find some more sites.

we should be an open city where anybody can live here. >> this is jim chapel. spur supports the proposed amendment as recommended by the commission. i don't have to reiterate, 16 new units including 400 affordable and an additional $235 million in new impact fees for community benefit. please pass this today. it does not need to be delayed any further. thank you. >> we have 20 listeners with 16 in queue. next speaker please.

>> good afternoon commissioners. i'm tracy with the civic centre. civic centre looks forward to the this plan to support our mission to foster more vibrant neighborhood. new sidewalks and public art will improve the public realm more active ground floor will live our streetscape. i like to thank the project team. they have been working with our nonprofit for some time helping to support our crews who has been out in the field caring for civic centre since o the onset f the pandemic. we very much look forward to working with all of the project sponsors and seeing things move

forward. thank you. >> i'm speaking of member of central city coalition and member of san francisco tenants union. i support a halt of the hub area plan until a thorough racial and social equity analysis is completed. the three projects planning commission has reviewed are significant supply of affordable housing for san francisco residents and should be allowed to move forward. however, having a clear understanding of the potential socioeconomic impact that future development will have on the vulnerable population within the area is paramount. this placement of current residents it is inevitable that needs to be addressed.

the right step forward is to uphold the commitment in the planning department resolution on racial and social equity and apply them to future development of community planning process that promotes an equity first framework is essential to building housing for all. neighboring sensitive communities believe that the equity studies can be completed in a timely manner and in month way hinder the current project. i do not support the creation of housing sustainability district. >> good afternoon supervisors. i'm a field representative. representing more than 3800 in

san francisco. timing of this project is critical. we share goal to produce more affordable housing. we support this amendment moving forward to generate jobs, transform the corner of market and van ness and provide significant improvement that will benefit the people of san francisco and support local businesses. we've had a long and positive relationship with lenders. the project will generate numerous jobs for our members. this is a privately owned and funded project. projects clear benefit to the community and any other further delay would jeopardize our jobs and new housing for the city. we urge you to move forward with this amendment. thank you and have a good day. >> supervisors, i'm alex, i'm research advocacy director with the san francisco electrical

construction industry i want to support the plan. american important -- more importantly to speak to the housing sustainability. its real value of equity tool. first of all, guaranteed union labor is not. what it does, is establish minimum labor standards to make sure everybody working on the project taking advantage of the streamlining provisions of the sustainability district are paid adequate wages to raise support and family here. value of union labor comes in. our contractors, our organizations themselves are at the centre of helping people get into sustainable construction careers through construction. which has been identified by the city for a number of years as really important pillar in the community workforce development and equity strategy. another really important aspect of the housing sustainability,

on sight affordable housing, all these projects and it ties into san francisco affordable housing requirement. what that means we'll be getting housing built at the same time as these other projects rather than having to wait through process and finding tax credits and piecing all those dollars together. at a time when public budgets are constantly strained. we are constantly being told we have to choose between needling our children or having open space or having work transit system to push this off on to the private sector is incredibly valuable. finally, i want to speak specifically to the 30 van ness project. they have engaged with labor all around, made a commitment -- >> thank you for your comments.

next >> supervisor peskin: thank you for correcting the member from the city planning department. >> i support the continuation of this item to next week. there's a lot here to digest. this project has been a long time and coming as it's been pointed out. there are few other things that can be added. thank you. >> good afternoon chair peskin,

supervisor safai, preston. we too share city's goal produce more housing and more affordable housing particularly. we're happy to support the 30 van ness project. they value good paying middle class construction jobs for local residents. putting local contractors to work. we have long relationship with them. the city move forward with these amendment as present to you today in the hub plan. thank you very much for your time.

>> good afternoon supervisors. this is jim. i live at 100 van ness right in the hub. i'm one of the two people who see what goes on everyday. i'm also on the board of the civic centre community benefit district. some you know i've been involved improving the civic centre for the last 35 years. the first thing about this plan which is important to me is that it deals with that intersection of market and van ness. it should be most important intersection in san francisco. it isn't. in its current condition, whole of people who work in the area, who live in the area and attend events in the area feel uncomfortable. some of the more elderly ones don't come because the way it is. the plan will encourage the building great buildings that

wonderful ground floor amenities that will take care of that. second issue is the affordable issue. supervisor peskin, making sure that the sale of 30 van ness from the city to a private developer, got the city in the appropriate amount of money its value as well as built-in requirement for affordable housing. that building should not be subject to any further comment. i'm please to report to you we've gotten the plumbers project under way.

we have other affordable housing in the area. >> thank you for your comment. next speaker please. >> we have 17 listeners with four in the queue. >> good afternoon supervisors. my name is robert, i live in district 5. i support the hub plan as amended. i believe it will bring significant benefits to the city, especially considering the hundreds of millions of dollars in benefits and in affordable housing. one statistic i want to bring to your attention is from between 19 housing inventory out of 1456 affordable units and out of 4850 total units built last year, we built 405 inclusionary units. that is less than 10% of all the

units that we built in the last year. the fact that this plan will bring 25% below market rate inclusionary units and it will provide dozens of millions of dollars in fees for 100% of affordable housing is an improvement over our existing standard. that is something that should not take lightly. thank you. >> thank you. members of the public who wish to provide public comment on should call (#41)565-5001. next speaker please. >> good afternoon supervisors. this is john jacobo calling from

the san francisco mission district where i happen to be from. i'm latino, i identify as latino. i don't think i need to tell the world what's happen to the mission district. since the year 2000, we've lost over eight latinos from this very neighborhood. black population in the city where many people have black lives matter signs up in their windows went from 15% to 3% arguably. i keep being told if we continue develop market rate housing it will trickle down to communities that everybody trying to get behind. because a member of the central city coalition, i put the amendments that we put forward. what we want is to take a pause to ensure that we can do a proper race and social equity sex oh assessment to ensure that this area plan is equitable and it helps match those black lives matter signs that everybody likes to put up on their windows. this we are putting race and

social equity at the forefront of something that isn't going to be constructed in the next six months with the covid backdrop. something we can take a moment to assess and ensure we are doing right. if we want to be the progressive amazing city that san francisco claims to be, we need to live through that by our actions. >> next speaker. >> good afternoon supervisors. i'm with the central city coalition. just like john said, i'm calling in to support the recommendation of halting the hub area plan except for the three proposed sites until a thorough social equity analysis completed. having planning department examine the socioeconomic impact of low income and working class black residents, living in the central city is the right step forward to uphold the commitments need in resolution

number 2738. this recommendation is not anti-development. rather it is complete planning process needed to strengthen the equity first framework to build not housing but homes for all. he's right. lot of people have this energy of how being black lives matter and now that we're trying to go implement that through action, we're still continuing all these current policies that has affected vulnerable communities. i highly ask that you continue on this item and let more of the public speak out on this issue. thank you very much. >> thank you for your comments. next speaker please. >> good afternoon supervisors. i'm calling in support of the

recommendation to pause the hub area plan with the exception three proposed on sites until we can get a thorough racial and social equity analysis. just a few weeks ago, the planning commission unanimously passed a resolution centring planning on social and equity. it's appalling to hear lot of the speakers on this line pushing to have this hub plan approved and pushing it through. knowing that race and equity haven't been analyzed. the neighboring sensitive communities believe that equity studies have been completed in a timely manner. this is no way going to hinder the three projects that have been proposed. they'll able to move forward. it's the right thing to do. if people haven't gotten the message yet, we need equity in

our cities and we need to protect our sensitive communities. thank you. >> next speaker please. >> we are calling in support of the recommendation of halting the hub area plan except for the three proposed sites until a thorough racial and social equity analysis is complete. it's important to look at the equity impacts before the hub plan is approve as equitable, it has not been addressed in the current plan. we can't be saying that's what we need and totally ignoring that when big project like the hub plan is put forward in front of you. this recommendation is not anti-development, it is the

community process needed to strengthen the equity first framework to build housing for all. in means all income, especially low income and house individuals and families who prioritizing their needs. 400 affordable housing is not enough out of the 1600, we would rather see half of that as affordable housing if you really want to talk about affordable housing for all. it is dangerous to count on trickle down economy to address social issues.

>> supervisor preston, you made a motion to continue this to the meeting of january 20th, i believe? >> july 20th? >> i'm sorry. [ laughter ] >> july 20th. on the motion, roll call, please. (roll call). >> you have three ayes. >> ok, that motion is pass asked we are adjourned.

>> after my fire in my apartment and losing everything, the red cross gave us a list of agencies in the city to reach out to and i signed up for the below-market rate program. i got my certificate and started applying and won the housing lottery. [♪]

>> the current lottery program began in 2016. but there have been lot rows that have happened for affordable housing in the city for much longer than that. it was -- there was no standard practice. for non-profit organizations that were providing affordable housing with low in the city, they all did their lotteries on their own. private developers that include in their buildings affordable units, those are the city we've been monitoring for some time since 1992. we did it with something like this. where people were given circus tickets. we game into 291st century in 2016 and started doing electronic lotteries. at the same time, we started electronic applications systems. called dalia. the lottery is completely free.

you can apply two ways. you can submit a paper application, which you can download from the listing itself. if you a plo apply online, it wl take five minutes. you can make it easier creating an account. to get to dalia, you log on to housing.sfgov.org. >> i have lived in san francisco for almost 42 years. i was born here in the hayes valley. >> i applied for the san francisco affordable housing lottery three times. >> since 2016, we've had about 265 electronic lotteries and almost 2,000 people have got their home through the lottery system. if you go into the listing, you can actually just press lottery results and you put in your lottery number and it will tell

you exactly how you ranked. >> for some people, signing up for it was going to be a challenge. there is a digital divide here and especially when you are trying to help low and very low income people. so we began providing digital assistance for folks to go in and get help. >> along with the income and the residency requirements, we also required someone who is trying to buy the home to be a first time home buyer and there's also an educational component that consists of an orientation that they need to attend, a first-time home buyer workshop and a one-on-one counseling session with the housing councilor. >> sometimes we have to go through 10 applicants before they shouldn't be discouraged if

they have a low lottery number. they still might get a value for an available, affordable housing unit. >> we have a variety of lottery programs. the four that you will most often see are what we call c.o.p., the certificate of preference program, the dthp which is the displaced penance housing preference program. the neighborhood resident housing program and the live worth preference. >> i moved in my new home february 25th and 2019. the neighborhood preference program really helped me achieve that goal and that dream was with eventually wind up staying in san francisco. >> the next steps, after finding out how well you did in the lottery and especially if you ranked really well you will be contacted by the leasing agent. you have to submit those document and income and asset qualify and you have to pass the

credit and rental screening and the background and when you qualify for the unit, you can chose the unit and hopefully sign that lease. all city sponsored affordable housing comes through the system and has an electronic lottery. every week there's a listing on dalia. something that people can apply for. >> it's a bit hard to predict how long it will take for someone to be able to move into a unit. let's say the lottery has happened. several factors go into that and mainly how many units are in the project, right. and how well you ranked and what preference bucket you were in. >> this particular building was brand new and really this is the one that i wanted out of everything i applied for. in my mind, i was like how am i going to win this? i did and when you get that

notice that you won, it's like at first, it's surreal and you don't believe it and it sinks in, yeah, it happened. >> some of our buildings are pretty spectacular. they have key less entry now. they have a court yard where they play movies during the weekends, they have another master kitchen and space where people can throw parties. >> mayor breed has a plan for over 10,000 new units between now and 2025. we will start construction on about 2,000 new units just in 2020. >> we also have a very big portfolio like over 25,000 units across the city. and life happens to people. people move. so we have a very large number of rerentals and resales of units every year.

>> best thing about working for the affordable housing program is that we know that we're making a difference and we actually see that difference on a day-to-day basis. >> being back in the neighborhood i grew up in, it's a wonderful experience. >> it's a long process to get through. well worth it when you get to the other side. i could not be happier. i could not be happier.

>> shop and dine in the 49 promotes local businesses and challenges residents to do their business in the 49 square files of san francisco. we help san francisco remain unique, successful and right vi. so where will you shop and dine in the 49? >> i'm one of three owners here in san francisco and we provide mostly live music entertainment and we have food, the type of food that we have a mexican food and it's not a big menu, but we did it with love. like ribeye tacos and

quesadillas and fries. for latinos, it brings families together and if we can bring that family to your business, you're gold. tonight we have russelling for e community. >> we have a ten-person limb elimination match. we have a full-size ring with barside food and drink. we ended up getting wrestling here with puoillo del mar. we're hope og get families to join us. we've done a drag queen bingo and we're trying to be a diverse kind of club, trying different things. this is a great part of town and there's a bunch of shops, a variety of stores and ethnic restaurants.

there's a popular little shop that all of the kids like to hanhang out at. we have a great breakfast spot call brick fast at tiffanies. some of the older businesses are refurbished and newer businesses are coming in and it's exciting. >> we even have our own brewery for fdr, ferment, drink repeat. it's in the san francisco garden district and four beautiful muellermixer ura alsomurals. >> it's important to shop local because it's kind of like a circle of life, if you will. we hire local people. local people spend their money at our businesses and those local mean that wor people willr money as well. i hope people shop locally.

first item on our agenda is roll call. president mccarthy. >> here. >> clerk: vice president moss >> here. >> commissioner jacobo. >> here. >> clerk: commissioner tam. commissioner tam. okay. thank you. commissioner clinch is excused

and commissioner alexander-tut is expected shortly. >> i am here. can you hear me? thanks for helping me figure this out. >> clerk: you're welcome. thank you. also wanted to read for the public, due to the covid-19 health emergency and to protect commissioners, the employees and the public, the building inspection hearing room is closed. however, members will be participating in the meeting it remotely. this precaution is taken pursuant to the stay-at-home order, and all proceeding and proceeding local and state and federal orders, declarations and directives. committee members will attend the meeting through video conference or by telephone, if the video fails. and participate in the meeting to the same extent as if they were physically present. public comment will be available on each item on this agenda. both channel 78 and sfgovtv.org are streaming the number at the top of the screen. each speaker will be allowed two minutes to speak.

comments or opportunities to speak during public comment period are available via phone by calling (408)418-9388, 146 632 7982. best practices are to call from a quiet location, speak clearly and slowly and turn down your television or radio. alternatively, you may submit public comment either the following ways, a couple of days prior to the meeting. email sonya.harris sfgovtv.org. it will be included as part of the official file. finally, items acted upon today are expected to appear on the building inspection commission agenda of july 15th, 2020, unless otherwise stated. our next item is going to be

item 2, president's announcement. >> good morning, everyone. thank you for your patience. as we are learning our way to getting these meetings started. thank you, sonya, for getting us all aboard here. as my president's announcements for july 15th, are as follows, good morning and welcome to our july 2020 building inspection commission meeting. our second webex, meeting. i'm joined today by our commissioner members, along with interim director patrick o'riordan and senior d.b.i. staff. as we continue to cope with the circumstances caused by the covid-19 pandemic, we are well into our first full quarter of providing billion inspection and permit services during a public health crisis. while we are certainly still working through many issues, including mayor breed's and the public health directives recent decisions to slow down the

city's reopening plans, as a result of an upsurge in key indicators that the department is -- upsurge of key indicators, the department is continuing to do an outstanding job of keeping both customers and staff safe, by adhering to rigorously to the public health protocols that have been fine tuned over the past month. and even though this public health protocols mean that 1600 mission is not open to the public, the department is continuing to issue permits, conduct on-site and scheduled job inspections. we respond to complaints and take code enforcement steps, as warranted. in addition beginning june 24th, the department began offering curbside services to speed up the issuance of the over-the-counter permits. i understand from interim director o'riordan that the department was given