it is a resource for the purpose of ceqa. established in 1835 as part of the early settlement of san francisco. in the early days the public functioned as unofficial and later official gathering space. some of the san francisco most important early buildings public square including californias first public school in 1847 and new city hall in 1852. 1961 the city of san francisco significantly altered the traditional park setting with a newcombpletely redesigned bi-level park above the four story underground parking garage. the square has served chinatown for more than a century and today provides public square for both residents and visitors. it is the site of many community sponsored events and performances. it is individually eligible for listing in the california register under the association of important events and local and state and national history. additionally, the scare is culturally sigany -- square is a community space to serve the chinatown community for more than a century. the period of significance extends fro

the prujt building has received an exemption by ceqa with the proposal for the demolition of the existing two-story residence. the 6,424 bedroom and with a four-bedroom and square foot garage with storage, two vehicle parking spaces and two class one parking spaces. with the 15-foot setback and the rear yard adjacent to the areas around july 82015. and over the years since the pre-application meeting, the project sponsor has performed substantial outreach to the adjacent neighbors in the proximity to massing and scale in relation to the budget block and the mid block open space and throughout this time the neighbors have been providing their concerns and comments to the department. through emails and phone calls and neb meetings. the project is modified since the initial submittal which at that time was proposed for the new construction of the five bedroom, single family home and working with the department, the project has been revised in scope with two equitable size and reduced by several feet and the facade to the clipper street district and treating garage with sloped areas. from the

and the -- from the requirements of ceqa and should require a full environmental report.neighborhood and the board members are aware the community is located in a neighborhood undergoing exciting changes. the board doesn't want now nor has it thought to oppose brandon in the project. and the free flow of traffic and the negative impact that its design poses to the palm residents quality of life and the health and safety. for these reasons they state the opposition to 490 brannan. >> thank you. that is your time. >> -- -- to deny the application. >> hello, commissioners. david wu and we're here in support of the performing arts base and other community serving facilities that will be created as part of the project and we ask that the project is not continued. more affordable and community accessible cultural facilities such as the community center and theater has long been a need in the south of market. and the need for performing arts space and was identified and came out of the soma filipino arts and cultural committee as rly as 2017. specifically the need for a larger a

there was no housing accountability analysis and it was barely a ceqa statement. and there was no streamline mechanism. i really think that these staff reports for every single item should include analysis of haa, and the streamlining act, and all of these housing laws because when you guys just approved all of these continuations and i look at item number 2 in particular and i asked, well, wait a minute, did you continue beyond the limits of the streamlining act? did you continue it beyond the limits of the sb330, and how many hearings did it have? when was the ceqa determination date and how long had it been and and the fact that you guys vote to continue a project without even a discussion of have you satisfied the state deadline is shocking to me. there really should be a discussion [indiscernible] because it satisfies their zoning and it can only be denied on written findings of unmitigatable impacts and we determine ceqa exempts -- [buzzer] you are done, right? i mean, that's what state law requires. so how come we're not talking about state law in any of yo

development at 1 and 45 adrian court in burling gamecalcal and to affirm the skwal determination. -- ceqa determination. >> president walton: that is adapted unanimously. >> item 30 is ordinance to amend the administrative code by setting march 31 as the annual due date to pay registration fees for weighing and measuring devices and automated point of sale stations used for commercial purposes. >> president walton: thank you. and seeing no one on the roster, we can take this item same house, same call. without objection, this ordinance is passed on first reading unanimously. >> item 31 is a motion to reappoint supervisor melgar to the association of bay area governments executive board regional planning committee, term ending september 23, 2023. >> president walton: thank you. i will entertain a motion to excuse supervisor melgar, made by supervisor ronen, seconded by supervisor peskin. madame clerk, on the motion. >> on the motion to excuse supervisor melgar from item 31, supervisor ronen. >> supervisor ronen: aye. >> supervisor safai: aye. >> supervisor stefani: aye. >> supervisor walto

since state law requires we approve the a.d.u.s in administrative process they are not subject to ceqa. state law does allow us to impose standards that prevent adverse impacts on any real property listed in the california register of historic places. they are not required to go through the process they are required to comply with the standards, specifically for real properties listed on the california register. we also can recommend and often do the design modifications. even though applicants are not required to comply. we suggest recommendations to improve quality of the communities. we can recommend these to preservation standards. lastly, in regards to fire rating which was covered very well. state law does require at least four-foot setbacks which may be enough for fire rating depending on occupancy. applicants can choose larger set back to eliminate the need for fire rating. thank you. >> thank you. to clarify you mean be the neighborhood design guidelines what they have more strict limitations onset backs with this ordinance with the a.d.u. programs and hybrid programs, the pro

i appreciate the second paragraph on the ceqa box on page 7 which pointed to the environmental documents that contra costa prepared. and on the j.p.a. itself, page 39, 48, should the puc address be the 13th floor and not the 10th floor. just a thought. anyway, that's what i have on item 12. thanks. >> thank you for your comments. madame secretary, there are no more callers in the queue. >> secretary: public comment on item number 12 is closed. >> president maxwell: may i get a motion to approve this item and a second, please? >> move it. >> second. >> i'll second. >> president maxwell: so moved and seconded. roll call vote, please. >> president maxwell: aye. >> commissioner moran: aye. >> commissioner paulson: aye. >> commissioner harrington: aye. >> commissioner ajami: aye. >> we have five ayes. >> president maxwell: next item please. >> the next item is item 11 authorize the general manager to execute amendment number 3 to the multiparty cost share agreement for planning of potential expansion of the los vaqueros reservoir extending up to one year until december 31, 2022 for a duration

without showing good cause for the failure, affirming the planning department's determination under the ceqa act, and making necessary findings. mr. chair? >> chair mar: thank you, mr. clerk. i want to thank mayor breed for bringing this item forward. chair rodriguez? >> thank you, mr. chair and thank you, mr. carroll, for that detailed explanation. good morning, chair mar, supervisor haney, and supervisor stefani. the item would make a number of amendments to the police code. i've split this up into three sections just for easy processing for today. thank you for pointing this out, chair mar. this has been a collaboration of a year-plus with the city, with all of you, with the mayor's office and the community to make sure that we get this right, very thoughtful and thought out thoroughly. we do have several slides, so i'm just going to walk-through them. next slide, please. so here with the three sections that we're going to talk about. with the first one, enacting the mayor's initiative to prioritize equity, there are three components that i'll talk to. the second is formalizing equity leg

i'm wondering, are we breaking into jail here and what the ceqa status would be. >> tom, do you want to take that or me? >> i can take that. or our planning director is here. >> director, in the intervening years between the last bike plan to now there have been a lot of provisions as a result of our time in san francisco that do set into place ways to exempt bicycle projects, planning documents in general, et cetera, et cetera. whatever we do in the context of the bike plan, we'll be working with the planning department at the right time to make sure it has appropriate and adequate ceqa clearance, whatever that looks like. we will work with them in a way to shape the plan that doesn't hold things back or withhold things. >> just to be clear, the plan itself is not just for bikes. it's for motorized modes. >> it would be [indiscernible] -- >> this is letting us think about bikes in the context of mode shift and equity. so it will hopefully be significant and transformative in terms of the roles that bikes and active transportation play in this city. >> and bikes includes electric bik

without showing good cause for the failure, affirming the planning department's determination under the ceqa act, and making necessary findings. mr. chair? >> chair mar: thank you, mr. clerk. i want to thank mayor breed for bringing this item forward. chair rodriguez? >> thank you, mr. chair and thank you, mr. carroll, for that detailed explanation. good morning, chair mar, supervisor haney, and supervisor stefani. the item would make a number of amendments to the police code. i've split this up into three sections just for easy processing for today. thank you for pointing this out, chair mar. this has been a collaboration of a year-plus with the city, with all of you, with the mayor's office and the community to make sure that we get this right, very thoughtful and thought out thoroughly. we do have several slides, so i'm just going to walk-through them. next slide, please. so here with the three sections that we're going to talk about. with the first one, enacting the mayor's initiative to prioritize equity, there are three components that i'll talk to. the second is formalizing equity leg

consideration of certain factors in determining whether to grant this authorization to a firm, the ceqa determination and to make the appropriate findings. >> chair: please call the roll on item 21. [ roll call ] >> clerk: for 11 ayes. >> chair: thank you. and i believe this item passes unanimously on first reading. madam clerk, we are now at roll call for introductions. >> clerk: yes, first member to introduce new business is supervisor peskin. >> thank you, madam clerk. as i mentioned yesterday, colleagues, at our land use hearing that supervisor ronin called, today i'm introducing a hearing that follows a number of complaints and concerns that i have received regarding the recent reorganization of the planning department, including what some believe might undermine the charter authorized zoning administrator who for decades has reported directly to the planning director that was true through all of bob hasner's tenure and until recently cory teagues tenure and that covers almost half a century. previous iterations of the department have prided themselves on internal architectural exp

consideration of certain factors in determining whether to grant this authorization to a firm, the ceqa determination and to make the appropriate findings. >> chair: please call the roll on item 21. [ roll call ] >> clerk: for 11 ayes. >> chair: thank you. and i believe this item passes unanimously on first reading. madam clerk, we are now at roll call for introductions. >> clerk: yes, first member to introduce new business is supervisor peskin. >> thank you, madam clerk. as i mentioned yesterday, colleagues, at our land use hearing that supervisor ronin called, today i'm introducing a hearing that follows a number of complaints and concerns that i have received regarding the recent reorganization of the planning department, including what some believe might undermine the charter authorized zoning administrator who for decades has reported directly to the planning director that was true through all of bob hasner's tenure and until recently cory teagues tenure and that covers almost half a century. previous iterations of the department have prided themselves on internal architectural exp

in part, this is why i filed my ceqa appeals anticipating all of this. i agree with the previous speakers. they've got it right on. kathy dluka put a fine point on the situation. here's what i have to say today, if i sound up set, i am. the j should be in the subway. there are slots available now and it is inequitable, absolutely inequitable to force j riders to transfer when other rail riders have a one-seat ride and are not forced to transfer at a portal. m.t.a. has the resources right now. we should restore all routes to at least pre-koed weekend levels. the resources are there to do that right now. false choices are presented here and m.t.a. has not presented any route abandonment under the city charter. we need you as members of the board serving here or on the board of supervisors to provide leadership here since m.t.a. is not. we need follow-up hearings at the g.a.o. committee after m.t.a. responds this thursday. there should be possible legislation. muni employees and their unions should be consulted in addition to the riders with the better and

would be required in this project if it was being proposed without referring back to the original ceqa application? >> sure, thank you for the question. the on-site affordability by the point at which the file for the environmental application. the grandfathering was also locked in because the project sponsor was able to obtain a site permit by the deadlines in 415 to retain the grandfathering for the old project. because the new project was found to be a substantial confirmity with the old project and did not require a new environmental evaluation application, it was able to retain the 13.5% on-site rate which was grandfathered. currently, the on-site rate for projects in the tenderloin depends on the tenure of the building. this project is in the north of market residential special use district which requires a 25% on-site rate for rental projects with more than 25 units. and a 27% on-site rate for ownership projects with more than 25 units. >> supervisor haney: so it sounds like if this project was not grandfathered in, that there would be a requirement of 25% affordable -- >> that'

since state law requires we approve the a.d.u.s in administrative process they are not subject to ceqards that prevent adverse impacts on any real property listed in the california register of historic places. they are not required to go through the process they are required to comply with the standards, specifically for real properties listed on the california register. we also can recommend and often do the design modifications. even though applicants are not required to comply. we suggest recommendations to improve quality of the communities. we can recommend these to preservation standards. lastly, in regards to fire rating which was covered very well. state law does require at least four-foot setbacks which may be enough for fire rating depending on occupancy. applicants can choose larger set back to eliminate the need for fire rating. thank you. >> thank you. to clarify you mean be the neighborhood design guidelines what they have more strict limitations onset backs with this ordinance with the a.d.u. programs and hybrid programs, the project sponsor allowed to actually do this w