is irresponsible to say no to best practices for land use and transportation. for the sake of future generations, we strongly encourage you to move forward with a recommendation today. thank you. >> good afternoon. and the planning director of the sfmta. i am here to say that the m.t.a. very much appreciates the actions taken by the planning commission and by supervisor kim and the planning department on this front. parking minimums have no place in a transit first city. they have no place in a vision zero city. and good transportation policy happens on both sides of the property line. i also want to add that in my 13 years working for this city in the planning department and at sfmta, i have never once had to echo being part of a discussion about a development project where there was any desire on the part of the city to see more parking added. there have been many discussions involving looking to have less parking added. our next step is to look at some parking maximums as well and stronger ones. most of all, i want to say, thank you. sfmta is fully supportive

landing sends pulses to the surface to measure speed and also distance. then the vehicle has to rotate out of the way to the parachute in the back shell don't follow on it using rockets to study the landing. >> what an exciting day. i almost can't wait. i'm really excited. landing on mars is never a foregone conclusion must have the time we tried to get into orbit or land on mars we have not been successful. >> and excitement around 3:00 p.m. on monday, viewers expected to gather and watch parties across the country but you can watch it live from your home. nasa will be broadcasting the whole thing online. arthel: fascinating, thank you. eric: the deadliest wildfire ever is distinctly now fully contained. the recovery efforts is far from over. rescue crews crews are now up again the aftermath. given the greenlight for britain's brexit deal. can they get support from their own parliament and can she hang on? >> you know, the truth is that we have here is the best deal available for the united kingdom in the european union. you all agree that's an insurance policy that has to be there. ♪ spread a little love today ♪ spread a little love my-y way ♪ ♪ spread a li

for helping us think through some of the knots in the plans that we really need to work out. i hope we can move this forward at a land use committee today and give this some daylight at the full board of supervisors. >> thank you. >> i am seeing this for the first time. i want to look at this real quick. i want to make a comments before i'm sorry. >> if i may, deputy city attorney. this may help you as you look through the amendments. the planning department has submitted a new version of the implementation document for the clerk's file and the amendments members two-7 reflect the changes that the planning department has made to the document. they submitted that the clerk on and those changes reflect decisions that the planning commission and this committee have made in the past. those amendments conform the document to the decisions you have already made. item number 1 is an additional amendment to the ordinance that supervisor kim is proposing today. the committee can only amend the ordinance and then the planning department will change the actual document later. so supervisor kim's amendment, number 1 on the list,

original ordinance that came to the planning commission and the full board, and i know it came to land use committee on april 25th, 2016. i don't know the ex act date that it went to the planning commission. did any member of the department or any commissioners bring up the point you are bringing up today? >> i don't believe so, no. >> if this is such an obvious issue, why wasn't it brought up earlier. >> the planning commission and board did discuss what the sunsetting provisions should be for projects. i think what occurred here was a little bit of a shift in gear from the prop c legislation that was in effect that had the hard date and the shift to the other ordinance. because the ordinance of the board was being discussed, and which that was not an issue, it is an issue that didn't come up. it was consumed under the broader conversation of should we have 36 months, is that from entitlement and when does it start. those are the conversations i remember having. >> at no point do i remember any staff member or economy commissioner bringing up our chew user clause which stated a project ha

>> i just want to thank the land use committee but i will thank you next monday. >> with that, we are going to continue items 11-15 to the next land use committee meeting of november fifth. we will do that without objection. are there any other items before us today? >> there is no further business. >> thank you. we are adjourned. >> good afternoon. welcome to the special meeting of the san francisco board of supervisors. today is november 2nd, 2018. thank you all for being here with us for this important matter. i will begin with attendance and i will lead the pledge of allegiance. we'll move to communications and then the members will nominate and appoint their presiding officer pro tem for the day. to roll call for attendance. [ roll call ] >> we have a quorum. thank you, ladies and gentlemen. please join me in the pledge of allegiance. >> i pledge allegiance to the flag of the united states of america. to the republic, one nation, under god, indivisible with liberty and justice for all. >> thank you. during the call of the rolls those marked present, those marked not present were

to move vehicles if it's being used. but thinking ahead to the nature of the roadways and potential congestion, we might want to think about where we could land emergency helicopters. >> one thing working in our favor with land use plan and open spaces is that all of utilities would be undergrounded. if we have overhead and cable lines, all of that will be undergrounded. other than light poles, as long as it's open space, it should be relatively easy for us to land something. i will talk to the staff that coordinates coast guard events and see what our options might be in the future. >> director lai: that's great. i know we're planting trees and taller things around the open spaces, too. signalization, great to hear that you are working with other agencies on it. i wonder if you can help me understand we've c, which is a type a street, is only signalized in that first intersection and not west of that. >> that's based on a projected traffic volume. >> director lai: do you know what year or volume they're projecting, using their models from? >> i'd have to go back and ch k check. >> director lai: and wondering when the next community workshop

was also taken out of the proposed ordinance and will be subject to the citywide inclusionary requirements. the land usecommittee voted unanimously to accept the ordinance and continue it to the november 5th land use committee meeting to allow time for the change to be properly noted. the committee considered supervisor if you are's ordinance that would create the 43,029th avenue s. ud to allow social services on property owned by a church. as you heard this item on october 11th of this year and recommended approval with modifications. the main modification was to make sure there would be no on site services provided. during the hearing, supervisor cam gave opening remarks and propose the ordinance be amended to include sir george include the recommendations. that amended was added without objection. there is no public comment on this item and it was recommended to the full board with a positive recommendation. they submitted a flexible retail ordinance. you heard this item and recommended approval with modifications. those modifications included items at supervisor tang presented to the commission whic

we came back to land use. you asked us to conduct outreach, which we did and we are here to hopefully move it out of committee and have you vote on it. a quick summary of what's in this legislation. all zoning districts have a maximum parking requirement, a ceiling, if you will. we aren't touching the ceiling or changing the maximums. there's not that many zoning districts but they cover a large geographic area. we are taking away minimums, we aren't making changes to off street loading requirements. a developer can still build from 0 parking spaces all the way to the maximum under the code. we have a broad policy framework that this board and committee have voted on over the years to support this sort of in principle and this supports all these goals on housing and affordability and place making and safety. and as supervisor kim made in her opening remarks there are many pathways in the code, the city effectively has no minimum parking requirements. there's no zoning district or special use district where the

and then come back to the land use committee. i did want to move forward with these really important improvements to the better street legislation today and get this passed by the board of supervisors. >> thank you, supervisor kim. so, we'll open up this item to public comment. item two, any members of the public who wish to speak? please come on up. >> grn. executive director of livable city. we are very much in support of this ordinance. we think it addresses compelling needs in our city. as we know, this city can be a dangerous place to walk and bicycle. the city can also be a city where its access to transit and transit performance is subpar. so this ordinance addresses those directly. what it does is makes sure as big development occurs, hopefully we make our streets and sidewalks, transit access accessibility for seniors, pedestrians, people with disabilities, etc., we make those better and at least don't make them worse. so we think closing the loopholes, some very large projects that we're able to flip through doing no imp

it is to reflect the intention of amendments made at land use october 29. t was pointed out to us it was not stricken in our plan which is often difficult to highlight and these are all technical amendments that substantive amendments made at land use committee. i ask we make a motion to adopt the technical amendments an this now becomes the first reading and we'll have the second reading next tuesday.d this now becomes the first reading and we'll have the second reading next tuesday. >> supervisor: before we do that, i'd like to take a moment, supervisor kim, the amendments are not substantive, they're technical? >> supervisor: they were already made at land use committee october 29, however there are multiple parts of the code that reflect different areas of the plan. we may refer to popos in that one section and amend it appropriately and it comes up in two other sections where we did not make the same amendment. by the way, this is a never ending process and this is one the action network note the amendment the community requested was not appropriately m

>> i just want to thank the land use committee but i will thank you next monday. >> with that, we areoing to continue items 11-15 to the next land use committee meeting of november fifth. we will do that without objection. are there any other items before us today? >> there is no further business. >> thank you. we are adjourned. women's netwo sustainable future . >> san francisco streets and puffs make up 25 percent of cities e city's land area more than all the parks combined they're far two wide and have large flight area the pavement to parks is to test the variants by ininexpensive changing did new open spaces the city made up of streets in you think about the potential of having this space for a purpose it is demands for the best for bikes and families to gather. >> through a collaborative effort with the department we the public works and the municipal transportation agency pavement to parks is bringing initiative ideas to our streets. >> so the face of the street is the core of our program we have in the public right-of-way meaning streets that can have areas perpetrated for so

the duplicated ordinance will come back to the land use committee in the next few weeks. in the file that is moving forward to the board, she included the planning commission's proposed amendments except for increasing 10,000 to 25,000 square feet and that was forwarded to the full board. next on the agenda was supervisor brown's ordinance that would establish specific inclusionary housing ordinance for n.c.t. district. they voted unanimously to accept the amendments and continue to the november 5th land use committee meeting to allow time for the fee change to be properly noticed. next the committee heard the mayor's ordinance that would modify the date projects are eligible for lower on site or off site inclusionary housing rates when they must obtain a site permit. commissioners you heard this october 11th and voted to recommend approval. at the land use hearing there were approximately 20 speakers, about two thirds in opposition and considered the proposed extension a give away to developers. they felt the ordinance went against the will of the voters and many referenc

i don't want to say that there is not forested land there, but i think one of the ways to look at it is would the modifications be compatible with the existing use of the land? if you're running -if you're operating a tree operation, cutting down and thinning trees is part of what you do. and it's not as if this would have to be done overnight. justice roberts: well, but the problem with that is, once you have the designation, you need probably federal permits to do things like logging companies typically do. and if you are asking for a federal permit, the whole point of the designation is you have to go through a fairly elaborate process. and you might not get it at the end. well, you won't have to go through the elaborate process, and you probably get one if it weren't designated. mr. kneedler: well, as far as logging is concerned, the ongoing logging operations here have not required any federal permit. and it's only if the landowner wanted to transform the land and use it for development and if that interferes justice roberts: which is exactly what they want to do, right? mr. kneedler: yes, but if that's true, then a section 7 -- excuse me,