>> this meeting will come to

order, welcome to the march 1, 2021 regular meeting of the land use and transportation committee of the san francisco board of supervisors. i am supervisor melgar joined by vice chair supervisor dean peskin and erin peskin. the committee clerk is erica major and i like to acknowledge and thank javierand maria for stopping this meeting. madam clerk, do we have any announcements ?>>erica major: due to the health emergency and to protect board members the board of supervisors legislative chamber and committee are" members will be participating in the meeting remotely. this precaution is taken pursuant to the statewide stay-at-home order and all local state and federal orders, declarations anddirectives.

the members will attend through videoconference andparticipate in the meetings to the same extent as if they were physically present . public comments will be available on each item on this agenda . either channel 26, 78 or 99 and sfgov.org are streaming the number across the screen. eachspeaker will be allowed 2 minutes to speak . comments are opportunities to speak are availablevia phone by calling the number on the screen at 415-655-0001 . again that number is 1-415-655-0001. the meeting id is 187 265 5594. the meeting id is 187265 5594 then press #, #. when connected you will hear the meeting discussion but you will be muted andlistening mode only . when your item of interest comes up please dial á3 to the

added to the speaker line. best practices areto call from a quiet location, speak clearly and slowly and turn you down your television or radio . alternatively you may submit public comment through one of the following ways, id myself the transportation clerk at erica.major@sfgov.org if you submit public comment via email it will be soon forwarded and be made part of the official file. written comments may be sent via u.s. postal service to city hall, room 244. san francisco california 94102. finally, items after today are expected to appear on the board of supervisors agendamarch 9 unless otherwise stated . madam chair. >>supervisormelgar: thank you madam clerk. now will you please call the first item ?

>>erica major: item 1 is a ordinance to implement expanded compliance control and consumer protection provisions for projects, individuals, agents and entities with a history of significant violations and affirming appropriatefindings . members of the public whowish to provide public comment on item number one should call the number on the screen. that number is 1-415-655-0001 . the meeting id is 187265 5544 and press pound and pound again. if you have not done so already please press á3 to line up to speak for item number one. thesystem will indicate you have raised your hand please wait untilthe system indicates you have been on muted when we get to public comment . madam chair >>supervisor melgar: this item was amended last week and we continued it as amended . we are now joined by amy

beinart, welcome miss beinart i see supervisor peskin has access speaking. we have ... >>supervisor peskin: i'm happy to defer to the chief of staff and i can go after. i think she will, our staff have beenworking together and i'm a cosponsor and i'll defer to miss beinart who is indicating she needs to be on muted . >>supervisor melgar: can we help miss beinart get on muted please ? >> unfortunately we can't unmute herthrough teams. let's see . if miss beinart is on the phone ...

>>supervisor melgar: miss beinart, are you here? >>amy beinart: i am, can you hear me? >>supervisor melgar: we can. >>amy beinart: can you hear me? okay, i'm really sorry, i'm having a lot of problems with teams but i'm here and i appreciate the time. amy beinart 82 hillary ronen. thank you supervisors for hearing this today and thank you for sponsoring lastweek . these are amendments to introduce today, these were emailed to you the clerkand your staff earlier today . city attorneys advised i respectfully ask that you adopt these today and send them to thefull board with recommendations . for the most part today's amendments are minor language

adjustments to make the legislation more clear and go and i'm not working with these unless you want to, first in section 103 861 describing the type of notices andviolations that will be tracked , we are further amending action 103 86142 delete including but not limited to work beyond the scale of the building permit and i think supervisor peskin may want to say something about that. second we have inserted language at the end of section 103 a-61 to conclude that the tracking file, that's not the expanded control list, the tracking file is internal purposes only and doesn't imply any violation of misconduct and last we have added language in section 103 a-63 to add factors that should be considered in

making the determination through the party of project onto theexpanded compliance control list . not limiting to but adding those supervised instructions for the analysis. so on behalf of of supervisor ronen i hope to receive your recommendation today. >>supervisor melgar: supervisor peskin. >>supervisor peskin: miss beinart cover the amendment this week and i want to thank her for working with my staff. we thank mister hafner as well. together with our city attorneys andthe department of building inspection , and look, i think we want to make sure that we are catching. we want to catch and not making legislation unenforceable or for that matter impeding less

experienced folks who make several honest mistakes. so she covered my amendments. i also want to reiterate the commitment made by dvi to my staff on the record here which is that they will promulgate administrative regulations and present them to this board of supervisors as to what constitutes substantial noncompliance in that subsection 4 that miss beinart just reference and what constitutesquote unquote egregiousnoncompliance inthe next agent , section 106 a 1038.6 .272 . and finally, it's not lost on me or i think on many of us that in some ways and i don't mean this critically, we have some fox guarding the hen house issues here and i just want to

say for the record that i want dvi and the building community to understand that supervisor ronen in my office will be monitoring implementation of this ordinance closely and one thing in particular that i will be watching is whether we see a spike in notices of correction or notices by previously issued because the former notices of corrections are not implicated in this ordinance and don't get you on the enhanced tracking list butthe latter notices of violation do and if that becomes the case , i believe supervisor ronen and i are ready to legislate accordingly so when it's the appropriate time i'm happy to move supervisor ronen amendments as set forth by missbeinart and that concludes my remarks . >>supervisor melgar: thank you so much supervisor peskin and

after reading the amendment and now you're in your explanation i just want to say i'm very grateful to you supervisor peskin for adding these amendments into this legislation. i think it's much better so thank you. supervisor preston, did you have comments? >>supervisor preston: just a quick clarifying question and i don't want to go the thanks chair melgar as you said to supervisorpeskin and supervisor ronen the work on this . i think this has been really solid legislation badly needed and i'm really pleased with what before us. the only question i have and this is not to suggest any changes but i just am trying to understand the scope of this and whether we would have to handle certain aspects of this in potentially in future legislation or through amendment and that's

specifically on the issue of the other substantial noncompliance . when i read that was in the 103 a-61, there's structural work beyond the permit, work or home without a license and then there's the broader catchall number four of other substantial noncompliance and i'm areas that , we're anticipating that violations from the housing inspection side, like repeated violations that are not technically violations of the permit but are violations of coderesulting in notices of violation , would it trip that and potentially when someone in the slip or if it's viewed as something maybe outside the scope of this understand the immediate and primary target ofthis is the abuse of permits . any clarification and i think especially sincedvi can deal with this , with a substantial

and repeated violations for example by a landlord who is also someone who is seeking permits . notices of violation against them, do we anticipate the trip subsection 4 substantial noncompliance wire or is it separate from that because it doesn't deal with abuse of a permit? and i don't know if that's an attorney? miss beinart. it's just a question for whoever knows the answer. >>amy beinart: that's a really interesting question, i don't know the answer i will defer to miss beinart at the subject expert. >>amy beinart: just venturing an opinion i would think it would include those substantial notices of violation and they

are provided as notices of violation and yes, but as you mentioned supervisor preston, if the follow-up to being on the tracking list is pending on theexpanded compliance control list for all measures to deal with for the department . so for the action taken after that which would only be with regard to the permits and not to other kinds of reports that thecity might want to take . for situations like that. i know john murray is here and i don't know if you want to add to that comment or not. >>chair melgar: mister murray, are you here? >>john murray: iam, john murray, department of building inspection . our understanding was this was pertaining to building permits specifically and not to housin

. i'm not sureexactly what the impact would be if we were to include housing under the umbrella here . again, this is all around misrepresenting conditions for building permits and not necessarily housing violations release income to the calculus here so i would defer to you all on that. but that isn't my understanding at this point. >>chair melgar: thank you mister murray, that's an interesting question supervisor peskin i wonder if having sat on the building commission and also on theboard of appeals , when it handful of folks as you know very well having done tenants rights work, the handful of folks who repeatedly violate you know, building code, housing codes and you

know, if we put them on the list and then if sort of you know, they can use that as an excuse not to hold further building permits . i wonder if we shouldn't be exempting them or trying to legislate further to clarify the intention and come up with remedies. is thatwhat you were thinking ? >>john murray: i just tried to clarity. i think has drafted and i should have prefaced all this with apologies to miss beinart and supervisors peskin ronen at this in the final minutes before i was preparing for this hearing. i wish i had raised this earlier, but i think that as miss beinart laid it out, abstracted that substantial violations are or noncomplianc

, substantial noncompliance as written would follow under a severe violation of housing codes by a landlord would presumably fall within that. but then also as miss beinart points out that wouldn't impact their conduct when they are seeking permits. but what i'm hearing from mister murray that may not have been the intent to cover those so i guess i'm just trying to avoid problems when there are implementing or creating the ranks around this . and hopefully have clarity does raise any issues to treat those violations as subsection for violations that would put someone on this list and if you say chairman you have to look at what you don't want to stop a permit from being pulled, that is to fixeverything that is in notice of violation . so yes, i don't know where that

ends up but it seems like at least having some clarity as we're moving this forward as to whether those are or not within these paragraphs subsection for violations. >>chair melgar: thank you, supervisor peskin. >>supervisor peskin: i put my little thumbs-up because supervisorpreston actually said what i was going to say . >>chair melgar: thank you. so if no other comments from my colleagues, let's take public comment on this item . >>erica major: thank you madam chair. it looks like there are no listeners in queue but if you'd like to make comments on item number one you can press á3 and we will see your handraised on our end .there are now 2 in

queue . if you could unmute thefirst caller . >>caller: good afternoon supervisors, corey smith on behalf ofthe housing action coalition . we appreciate the continued conversation around this topic and it's really important. just wanted to reiterate comments we made last week regarding death fund dvi to carry out this important task and other complicated pieces for you all to consider, thank you. >>chair melgar: thank you mistersmith. do we have any other public comments, madam clerk ? >>erica major: maria, if you can unmute the last caller please. >>caller: good afternoon chair melgar and supervisors, i'm ryan patterson and i'm often

hired to help resolve notices of violation and other problems withconstruction projects . i want to thank you againfor protecting the integrity of the permitting process. i am concerned about some of the specifics here . construction professionals will be deprived of their livelihood are being associated with projects as notices of violation but this decision would be taken behind closed doors dvi notices are not appealable in sanfrancisco. i'd like to highlight a couple sections . section 103 a-61 says identifying all individuals agents and other entities associated with the permit and/or project , section 10386.2 says associated with three or more reported violations. though there is a conflict between the first sections language aboutbeing associated with a permit of the project versus the second sections

language about being associated with a violation . second it would violate due process rights put someone on this list merely for being associated with a project or recorded violation such as an architect is hard to of a violation. 103 a-62 should beamended to say three or more violations rather than associated with . and the initial determination by dvi should be made in the process and testimony can be taken over penalty of perjury in the public will have the ability to give evidence. lastly today changes sound substantive but have not been read into therecord and i request anopportunity to review them before this is passed out of committee . thank you for your attention to this .>>chair melgar: thank you mister patterson, any other callers? >>erica major:maria, if you can unmute the last caller .

>>caller: linda chapman. i would hope that some supervisor sponsoring this would like to talk with me because i have a whole string of cases in which dbi did not take action about: circumstances in which people whocomplained only resulted in retaliation . serious retaliation. my co-op, i was driven from my co-op because i went to department of building inspection with the contracts and architectural drawings and so far how to structure 81 and a half billiondollars , $77,000 which was just being covered up by, the project manager we hired an everest construction people. john stuart was on the property managers is peskin's office and

a needy senior inspector says you will have to waitfor the next earthquake and i could give you details about that . same kind of thing is happening. i was told by my ho a and condo where i took refuge to go and get advice from the building inspectors. i did and they assured me this is noncompliance and it's very serious and dangerous threat to public safety, anybody could see it but on the other hand they were going to enforce so i've been two years biting it out of the department of housing as an ada complaint and now i am being sued for exemplary damages mind you, promotedby the president of my co-op , you know the nice guy with the equal opportunity to present of disabled people on the streets and whenthey're no occupying his time there's the

elderly woman as he calls me , then there was nabil senior housing, that's a whole other story .the people from nobhill, they kept trying to filecomplaints about ... >> speakers time has elapsed . >>chair melgar: any other public commenters? >>erica major: dv has confirmed that was the last caller. >>chair melgar: public comment is now closed. is there a motion toassess the amendment as presented by superintendent and staff ? madam clerk, will you please call theroll on this item ?>> promotion as stated by supervisor peskin. [roll call vote]

>>chair melgar: thank you mada clerk, is there a motion to send this item to the full board with a positive recommendation asamended ? >> approved. >>chair melgar: madam clerk, will you call the roll please . >>erica major: [roll call vote] on the motion as stated by supervisor preston, supervisor peskin .supervisor preston. supervisor melgar. you have 3 ayes. >>chair melgar: please call item number two. >>erica major: item 2 is a resolution designating landmark designation under item to for the trocadero clubhouse and recreation grove located at 2750 19th avenue and extending the prescribed time which the historic preservation

commission may render its decision by 90 days. members of the public who wish toprovide public comment on item number two to callthe number on their screen , 1-415-655-0001 . the meeting id is 187-695-5994. please dial á3 to line up to speak. the system prompts will indicate you have raised your hand. wait until the system indicate you have been unmute it when we get to public comment , madam chair. >>chair melgar: we are not joined by supervisor mark who is sponsoringthis initiation supervisor, would you like to share some remarks ? >> thank you for your time today considering this resolution to initiate a historic landmark designation for the trocadero clubhouse inside stern grove and also thank youfor your cosponsorship . if you can walk into the annual

music festival or participants there you know that it's beautiful distinctive and beloved yellow building among the eucalyptus and pine trees right next to the third grove amphitheater. it'sa unique public venue used for many public and private events . managed by park. the trocadero has been a source of community pride especially on the west side since 1931 when they were gifted to the city by rosalie stern. built in 1892, the trocadero clubhouse is the earliest building in the parkside district , one of the last surviving 19th century doctors in western san francisco and one of the last contact examples of the 19th century rowhouses at once lined the roads of western and southern

san francisco. it was by george green junior is an example of state architecture. was originally meant to be an institutionfor san francisco elite as one writer put it , the roadhouse clientele usually consisted of troops of less refined men out for a day of drinking, dining and perhaps gambling and it was the site wherepolitical boss gave ruth was arrested during the government corruption trial after the 1906 earthquake and fire . in the decades to follow the trocadero became a rare recreational enclave for women. women's and girls club , job training classes and suffragette meetings and when rosalie stern bought the land from george greene in 1931 he hired renowned master architect renard ray back to restore the truck. she named the site site segment stern grove after her husband donated it to the city of san francisco to beused only for recreation , music, dramatics and pageantry and annual music festival was held in 1938.

the talkingclubhouse has been used for a wide range of special events , sponsored by the city and by the public on a rental basis and my first time inside this amazing building was actually with my daughter and some of her friends years ago at raglan park halloween festival where the trocadero was converted into an awesome hauntedhouse and the 19th century architecture definitely added to the ambience . colleagues, it's important that we look at historic landmark and through the lens of different experiences in all parts of the city including westside and not just in the realm of the most. architecture may be the most ornate, most and worthy of historical distinctions . the history and cultural significance of the parkside like many other historically working-class neighborhoods has often been overlooked this really sparked the creation of

the group parkside heritage last year.i'm very grateful for their work proposing and advocating for this landmark the efforts do lookforward to supporting their future work . and besides parksideheritage i have someone to francisco heritage, western project . i'm a part politicization sunset parkside education action committee for all their work to initiate a landmark in of the talking and really just for all of their ongoing dedication and advocacy for the sunset parksideand westside communities . colleagues and staff are availableto answer any questions . and at the request of the planning department resolution does include a 90 day extension or historic preservation review due to limited staff capacity thecurrent request for other landmark designations . so colleagues, i urgeyour support in this resolution . >> thank you supervisor.

it's also a family favorite for my family as well. supervisor peskin. >> i want to say how pleased i am so many supervisorsare initiate landmark designations . this one is absolutely deserved and i'm really pleased that they are being gone all over the city and in this case in the parkside and would like to be added as a cosponsor. >>chair melgar: thank you supervisor, supervisor preston class just wanted to thank supervisor peskin for bringing this forward and i want to be added as a cosponsor as well. >>chair melgar: i want to thank supervisor peskin for bringing this to us and letting me be added as a sponsor and its right between the border of 47.

the stern grove is such a vibrant, wonderful part oflife on the west side . it is, i am thrilled that we are doing this, thinking area supervisor peskin. >>supervisor peskin: i wanted to say insofar as this was the this where then boss even ruth was arrested, some things never seem to change. >>chair melgar: thank you supervisor. madam clerk, do we have any public comment ? >>erica major:maria is checking to see if we have any callers in queue . please let us know if there are any callers that are ready. if you have not done so less star agreed to beadded to the queue and for those already on hold continue to wait until the

system indicates you have been unmute it . maria, if you can unmute, we have five colors in two. >>caller: island bogan, president of speak action committee. he is install support for initiating landmark designation for the trocadero clubhouse. the many reasons for landmark designation included in the resolution itself. as well as in speech written comments. now, speaking on my own behalf, i believe there to the talking in the recent move of the house of tori. in the headline in the book section, tony bravo described as and i quote, ss comes together for historic the victorian move and reclaims of these are the sole area he went on to write , in the scheme of things seeking one historic building is not make up for the other enormous losses we have suffered as a city, we needed something tofeel good about .

even in the midstof the pandemic , there was a feeling of joy as he watched the house process. there was also a feeling of coming together as acommunity that has been hard to come by lately . on a final note, on the passing lawrence ferlinghetti whose work helped us reclaim our heart and soul. rest inpower, rest in the changing light . thank you. >>. >>chair melgar: next speaker please. >>caller: this is woody malaki from san francisco heritage. also allof the parkside district is the context in which darrell was featured . there is the latest on the last example of what was thespring rowhouses on the west side of

town and it has been an important community space or generations of san franciscans . it's history and its design, itsintegrity and its connection and residence to thesouthwest part of town, the trocadero is a significant and special place to many of us . heritage strongly endorses this initiation , supervisor peskin and his staff forhaving put this forward and for the other supervisors are coming out as cosponsors thanks so much. >>chair melgar: thank you, next collar please . speed. >>caller: my name is jim marcel and i'mspeaking at a past president of san francisco victoria alliance . we also have enjoyed the treasure that the trocadero is. we've been having meetings there personally just enjoying it as a venue when we visited stern grove. i really supervisor mar mister

labounty stated all the reasons why this is so critical to save and preserve and so i won't reiterate, just offer my continued support for your efforts to advance this landmark in process with great thanks from the members of the victorian alliance. >>chair melgar: thank you mister rochelle. next speaker please. >>caller: good afternoon, my name is jonathan rothman and resident of the parkside district as well as a member of parkside heritage and i want to express my gratitude to provide mar and to the cosponsors spoken up as well as an the comments from all of her speakers.

i return to san francisco about six months ago afterbeing only about 15 years but i did grow up in the . there are many treasures locally here but the trocadero is especially sweet and it's nice to see that very committed effort to bring the trocadero to the attention of pursuing landmark status and sharing it with eight folks who come into the city and enjoy the treasures of all corners of the city is part of putting the western neighborhood on the map there. but thank you all very much and thank you for the time to offer this comment.thank you. >>chair melgar:thank you mister boston. any other public commenters ? >>erica major: 2 more callers into. >>chair melgar: next commentor please.

>>caller: my name is evan rosen and i'm parkside heritage. i'm delightedthis committee is taking a landmark designation for the there . too often decision-makers think and act like there's not much worth keeping and restoring in western neighborhood and sometimes there's even a stigma sunset and parkside district and that some of the architecture is different from that the orioles square but the longer i live in parkside the more i come to see how significant this neighborhood is and there's a lot worth keeping and restoring and improving in parkside. the trocadero is inappropriate for us to start because it's inextricably linked with the history of our city but you know, the trouble darrell is just one of the many structures that are part and parcel of the character and relevance of the

western neighborhood. you have chernow station in the parkside, foresthill station , the empire the building unless florida avenue and the list goes on and on . these structures give francisco the look and feel and the character that has drawn people here for so many generations so that you supervisors for recognizing the significance and role of the trocadero and thank you for voting infavor of initiating landmark designation . >>chair melgar: thank you misterrosen. next public commentor please . >>caller: the trocadero clubhouse is important to every san franciscan regardless of the neighborhood one lives and i'm glad the supervisors present on this call will vote in favor of this landmark will track all san franciscans fashion especially those who attendconcerts and events in the growth . thank you very much. >>chair melgar: thank you

commentor. any other public commenters madam clerk? >>erica major: dp has confirmed that was the last caller. >>chair melgar: public comment is now closed. can we have a motion to pass this resolution to the full board with positive recommendation? madam clerk, willyou call role please ? >>john murray: >>erica major: [roll call vote] you have 3 ayes. >>chair melgar: the motion passes. madam clerk willyou call item number three . >>erica major: item 3 is an ordinance amending the planning code by revising zoning matching sheet dn 07 to rezone

118 through 124 kipling street from residential enclave to residential care district next and affirming appropriate findings. >>chair melgar:thank you very much. we have westlaw from the planning department who will present on the site . welcome. >> alex west, planning department staff. the proposed project will reconfigure an existing motor vehicle repair operation by converting 8006 nine square feet of existing vehicle storage on 39, 41 and 42 block 3516 two 4 parking level stackers. the project would install approximately 32 feet seven inch tall metal screenings and mckittrick street frontage and

the proposed stackers would accommodate 200 net new vehicles. the existing 46 and a half curb cut would be removed. a conditional use authorization was approved by the san francisco planning commission with the condition the board of supervisors approves a zoning amendment which read the 4 subject parcels from a residential enclave district zoning to a residential mixed zoning district which would then be available storage and the planning commission, this project fits in with the general plan as well as the san francisco planning code thank you and i'm welcoming any questions . >>chair melgar:thank you so much mister westhoff . colleagues, do we have any commentsor questions for mister westhoff ? okay, seeing a madam clerk

let's take publiccomment on this item . >>erica major: thank you madam chair. we have maria to check and see ifwe have any colors into. if you havenot done so pressed á3 to be added to the queue . not until you have been on muted . maria, we have one and two, if you can unmute the first colum . >>caller: good afternoon supervisors, john kelly on behalf of the project sponsor the reason the legislation is necessary to complete the proposal renovation of the existing auto repair operation between 11th and 12th streets, a quick review of theproject , existing operation consists of a auto service building to vehicle storage lot and the projects will construct a nonretail car wash new cars and

service colors it would construct a series of stackers on the service wants to increasethe capacity of vehicles on site . the stackers would be used for vehicles under service new vehicles being displayed dealerships on 14 south van ness and we will be constructing three walls with landscaping on both on both kipling. the project would improve the operations forroyal motors in the neighborhood role motors would no longer have to move cars to the nearby parking garage . of all the circulation would be internal which would take the number of cars off the streets and in particular kipling street which is kind of a low density more residential oriented street. it would also eliminate 60 feet of existing heard on howard and kipling so it will be a significant improvement for pedestrian safetyin the area the project will initiate existing pdr operation at the site . there are currently 88 service

vehicles at the site, a large operation and this will consolidate the vehicle storage and service for the nearby dealerships as well so we keep it all on one site . the commission approved the project in two phases and has recommended approval of the legislation, we work with two adjacent neighbors to the east anddesign modifications to get the principle of the project . a product will maintain and enhance theexisting pdr operation that has occupied the site for 40 years and with that werespectfully request you support the legislation and we're here if you have any questions . >> see one any other public commenters on this item ? >>erica major: maria from dp has confirmed that her no more callers and you see one public comment is now closed area are there any further comments for their emotion to process item out of committee with apositive recommendation ?

>>supervisor preston: when pieces of legislation come along they are usually answered bythe districtsupervisor . this is an exception to that general practice . i'm not through the board packet, before we do this supervisor haney i assume is fine with this. >>chair melgar: has anyone heard from supervisor haney's office western mark ifnot, mister westhoff would know this ? >>alex westhoff: wediscussed this with supervisor haney's office . he did not oppose rezoning. >>chair melgar:supervisor peskin, any further questions ? >>supervisor peskin: no.

>>chair melgar:would anybody like to make a motion ? >>supervisor preston: so moved. >>chair melgar:thank you. madamclerk, will you please take role . >>erica major: on the motion as stated by supervisor peskin . [roll call vote] you have 3 ayes. >>chair melgar: motion passes unanimously . madam clerk will you please call item number four. >>erica major: item number four is a reenactment of emergency ordinancenumber 154 20 . temporarily prohibiting construction projects and buildings of any residential units require the suspension of water or utility service to residential tenants providing alternative sources and affirming their findings,

members of thepublic who wish to provide public comment on item for you call the number on the screen, that's 1-415-655-0001 . and the idea is 187 665 5594. if you've not done sopressed á3 to lineup to speed and the system will indicate you greater hand . madam chair . >>chair melgar: supervisor peskin thank you for introducing this item, would you share your remarks. >>supervisor peskin: decided as a reenactment of emergency ordinance that we passed unanimously last august. remain in place for the days as emergency ordinances do before it expired and the legislation before us withrevised for another 60 days . this legislation not unlike the enhanced compliance legislation

that we considered earlier on this agenda addresses bad behavior at the periphery of the construction industry, not commonplace behavior and i do not in any way suggest that behavior that is being addressed by this ordinance is pervasive or the norm. actually to the contrary. it is the last resort for the handful of people experiencing repeated water utility shutoffs with consideration from a previous landlords. in isolated instances i believe those shutoffs verged on harassment approaching constructive eviction of long-term tenants. tenants often approach our office that we don't have the tools to provide any dpi short of this legislation doesn't have the tools to provide, and i know several offices have heard from tenants experiencing ongoing construction.

water shutoffs and electrical shutoffs, all trying to shelter in place and work from home . so i hope each of ouroffices can now point constituents to this guidance . as the baseline relief we expect during the pandemic. andfor the landlord and building industry this legislation is entirely avoidable if landlords and tenants arrive mutually agreeable terms . this is really about engendering and encouraging that type of communication. i really want to thank chair melgar for indulging our request on this report and know at least a few tenants who will enjoy its benefits in the near-term and onein particular in my district . this reenactment comes as this committee has unanimous support of the commission to ensure this legislation on the 17th and i look forward to it being reenacted unanimously at

tomorrow's boardmeeting . i want to thank my staff and also mention that we met with the san francisco apartment association to address questions that they had regarding re-upping this ordinance for an additional 2 months . >>chair melgar: thank you supervisor peskin and thank you for introducing thisitem. visor preston . >>supervisor preston: ,i want to go to roger peskin. please add me as a cosponsor i was with your original ordinance and i want to say that this is kind of emergency ordinance that does not lend itself to being on the front page of the newspaper in big headlines but has an absolutely enormous impact on people's lives and i think all of our offices were hearing from constituents who were dealing with this nightmare scenario of originally the emergency

ordinance addresses which you as you are stuck at home and your following rules and you have an abusive landlord, not a reasonable one and they are seizing the opportunity to make your life tell through water shops and other utility interference with utilities so i will say and this is not statistically significant at all but the numbers of those constituents reaching out definitely dropped after passage of this ordinance and we did have a place as you say for roger peskin to send both when this happened and the other thing to point out is that a lot of times when these things come forward people predict the sky will fall and it will be hard for people to navigate these rules and i'm not aware of any difficulty anyone's having in navigating these rules and we hear from landlords in the district if they are having trouble

following a new road and as roger peskin has said this was clearly tailored to deal with the situation that i don't think anyone operating in this space has any trouble complying with it so i'm happy and thank you for your leadershipthrough roger peskin . >>supervisor peskin: thank you for yourcosponsorship . >>chair melgar: i would like to beadded as acosponsor as well. madam clerk , did we have any public comment on this item ? >>erica major: maria from dp is checking to see if we haveany callers and you . if you'd like to be added to our queue for this item you just need to press á3 we have 2 callers. if you onthe first . >>caller: linda chapman. thank you supervisor peskin and if only i were a renter i would be able to benefit to instead of being sued and having to run around trying to find out if

i'm going to find a lawyer to sue theequal opportunity oppressor . so i would like to suggest you might want to consider instead of saying rental units saying residential units. i've mentioned in past hearing that those of us who live in ho ways , while there's a whole system of state regulation about what's supposed to be done by the board and so on that they do not have the equivalent of the rent board when we wrote the rent control law , we put a rent board that people can go to for enforcementbut we don't have that . the other thing that i would suggest is to put in compliance with the covid guidelines for construction. in my unit i've been living here through five months of industrial-strength noise. from the construction

downstairs in the unit which i never complained about and all what are shutoffs which i never complained about and all the times that they came into my unit because they weretrying to figure out where the leak came from and it wasn't from my unit but they came in a lot of times . finally i found myself in my little kitchen people from five different household for this lengthy meeting and the two poor latino plumbers back again being subjected to complete violations of the regulations and two of them in the sink where they didn't need to be and the next thingi'm told is that they're going to come in and read about my kitchen walls with no permits, no contract. the ho a has a right to do contract , obviously which would protect me and the ho way so i'm going to get permits and so onthat note, equal opportunity oppressor tells the owner downstairs you will authorize $1500, just have his contractors come in and knock

out my wall . quick's speakers time has elapsed. >>chair melgar: thank you very much. next public comment please . >>caller: seems the board is being a little bit disingenuous with this legislation insofar as initially when this legislation was introduced it was advertised as being something for people who had to go home all day, they can't go outside and if their neighbor is doing construction, who wants to shelter at homewhile their neighbor is doing construction . and now you're telling us that it's to prevent landlords from driving tenants out. certainly a wonderful thing to prevent landlords fromharassing

their tenants . i mean, i applaud that but if that's the case then why is it being done as a reenactment of the three-day emergency ordinance? surely there are other ways of preventing landlords from dragging their tenants out and spending a 60 day emergency ordinance to ensure that you can have some sort of long-term legislation to achieve this goal that a 60 day emergency ordinance. i suppose to give the benefit of the doubt maybe this is the easiest and most convenient way of achieving this goal since certainly there are a lot of landlords with a lot of nonpaying tenants right now who would rather not have those properties right now so i suppose that's a big issue right now. but in that case, maybe the

board of supervisors need to deal with these larger structural issues and of course there's a lot of large structural issues right now. so there's a lot to deal with but i don't know. quick's the speakers time has elapsed. >>chair melgar:thank you so much. madam clerk do we have any other public comment on this item ? >>erica major: maria from ds has confirmed that was the last caller. >>chair melgar: public comment is now closed. is there a motion to pass this item out of committee with a positive recommendation as the committee reports >>supervisor preston: so moved >>chair melgar: madam clerk will you please call the role . >>erica major: [roll call vote]

you have 3 ayes. >>chair melgar: the motion passesunanimously . madam clerk, would you and please call item number five. >>erica major: item 5 is a resolution urging office of economic and workforce to the planning department to meet the full transportation agency, department of public works, fire department and recreation department to develop a proposal for a permanent shared space program and affirming the board creating a permanent version of the program members of the public who wish to provide public comment on item 5 to call the number on the screen, that's 1-415-655-0001 . the meeting id is 187 265 2954. please wait until the system indicates that you have been on unitwhen the public comment .

madam chair. >>chair melgar: argument on file supervisor amy who is sponsoring this item. supervisor amy will you please share your remarks. >>supervisor haney: good to see you all. we are all familiar with the chairs program.it has provided alifeline to small businesses , neighborhoods and help to activate and beautify our commercial corridors. while this board has already unanimously established our support for the shared spaces program via resolution and unanimously passed by supervisor peskin's ordinance, fees for tables and chairs and creating the use of parks till april 2022 the future of the shared spaces program or some version of it is uncertain. the shared space permits will

initially scheduled to expire at the end of 2020 but in october permits were extended through june 30, 2021. the permit of thisresolution is todemonstrate the board's support for a permanent version of the shared spaces program that continues to streamline permanent . i've also had a focus on prioritizing equitable and accessible citywide participation . last fall we established support for moving forward and creating a plan to make elements of shared spaces program permanent and an analysis of how to make the program is currently underway. the resolutionurges oed to play a part in public works and the parks department to develop a proposal to make a permanent

>>chair melgar: welcome to the land use and transportation committee of april 1. we are reconvening the meeting on item 5. and i have asked supervisor amy to resume his remarks because it seems that we were cut off during the first time he made them. supervisor haney. >>supervisor haney: should i start from the beginning? >>chair melgar: i'm afraid so. i'm afraid you were cutoff right when you started . >>supervisor haney: so this resolution is for our board to

show support and demonstrate support for a permanent version of the shared space program. the shared spaces program over the last nine months is a vital lifeline to small businesses and activating neighborhoods and commercial corridors. i did want to thank and acknowledge the work that this board has alreadydone to support this program including the resolution , the supervisor peskin's ordinance and renewal fee and also the leaving of fees through april 2022.the future of the shared spaces program and its permanence is still somewhatuncertain although there are positive signs . mayor reed established her support on the planto make elements of the shared spaces program permanent .this resolution would urge m.d., mta and the planning department to develop a proposal for a permanent shared spaces program

in early 2021. there is legislation now being prepared and supervisor peskin has been working on it so that's a positive thing since this resolution was first introduced. i think it's important we make this statement together as a board that we are in support of a permanent version but i do think it's important any permanent version that we learn from what happened during the last few months that things that we can improve if we want to make sure we include to ensure accessibility and all of those things i think are critical. the shared space program has had four 2300 applications nearly 2000 approved. the 1600 small business owners that filled out an impact survey, 80 percent want to continue operating outdoors 90 percent had these shared outdoor spaces havekept them from closing permanently . other areas with programs

include already established permanent programs to support small this . i know that there are some amendments from supervisor peskin which i'm supportive of and we have today the president of the small business commission and the shared great spaces program staff and the mayor's office sophia kitchener so i do think that this strong statement from the board of supervisors in support of a permanent shared space program is still absolutely needed and we're all looking forward to digging in and a lot more depth on legislation that comes forward that would do that. so i'll pass it back to you madam chair and we are prepared to present as well. >>chair melgar:thanks for your patience . president, thank you for your patience. ifyo