mr. thornily, thank you for your presentation. i just want to sort of put in perspective what we're considered, which may help public comment and help us frame what we're voting on here today. my understanding is that the policy guidelines you are putting forward today are the policy guidelines around equity, the policy guidelines around ensuring there's sufficient communication and outreach. if we're going to adopt one of these bans on a block by block basis, we're doing it in coordination with those principles. but that you are not proposing today the consideration of say whether it's a school zone and those are things for future consideration. is that correct? >> well, no, actually, we do want to the extent that we've given you this paper and it's completeness, that business is a top of page 7 does matter. >> let me ask about that. for a school, for example. i assume that thinking there is children are vulnerable to parking may be particularly problematic if there are children around. the ban we're talking about is an over-nigh

mr. thornily eager to secure approval with the direction to amend, it sounds like there's inc enough here the board is seeking changes in this document that we should change it and bring it back. there were a few things, or one at least, that would be helpful to get direction from the board. it's concentration issue. the rest i think that there is enough thoughts from the board that i think merit redoing the document. there's also a question of whether the board wants to adopt it as policy or just us bring it back as an informational item. we can do that either way. this maybe too many moving parts for us to ask you to approve it now given the good discussion and feedback we've gotten from you. >> let me introduce two more. [laughter] one comment and one question. as i look at these guidelines in addition toll school yard and the parks, residential streets with limited on street parking, does not describe most of san francisco in my view? i'm not sure of any neighborhoods that have an abundance of an street parking. the phrase about blight as we know the history of city planning, the phra

mr. thornily, do you feel you've heard enough from us to get a sense of what it is we're looking for to round this policy out and bring it back again? >> i believe i do. my colleagues in the bleachers are paying attention. >> i will say since it was maybe the one sort of point where maybe there was disagreement, what director borden said at the end that one of the considerations is the concentration of vehicles, that's fine. it's a great way to deal with it. obviously greater concentration needs greenser need. there are other factors and i think the way that she proposed it is i would be happy with that. >> excellent, thank you. >> understood. >> thank you all for a very robust discussion and thank you members of the public. and now i believe -- >> we're going to go back to item 10.2a. >> i'm sorry, on item 11, do we need a motion to continue? no? >> i don't think so. >> we'll just bring it back when we think we have something that is ready. >> i suppose that raises the question of -- you know, i know my next bus system is going to take a while but i assume this isn't going to take very long.