and autopsy optioned and unfortunately, if we sprint to the end we'll not have the opportunity to see supervisors kim legislation and supervisor wiener's legislation side by side. we need adequate time. we need at least until the end of may for the process to be completed. so, please do not short circuit this process. one of the things that are important that was mentioned earlier is the powers of the e r o. it maybe truthful but we need clear guidelines and we need an appeal process. so thank you supervisor kim for having that. this is not a sprint we need the time we need to have optioned. thank you >> thank you. >> supervisors we're on record as supporting supervisors wiener's current legislation. this process i guess testament to the degree of importance that we all hold sequa in. it's the standard-bearer of laws in the long run. it serves a good purpose but it's if it's allowed to be abused it's bad. so the fact we're here having this conversation about codifying the process is a wonderful process. i would take a little bit of disagreement about sprinting to the finish line i think we're close to codifying rolls rules for projects and for mitigating the process is important. the sequa process impacts residents who are both neighbors of projects and it has to be fair to both currently it's not fair to either. i think supervisors chu's ideas but we hope in the next couple of weeks it benefits all the residents of the city >> thank you. >> thank you very much. >> i just wanted to i'm not going to reap the previous speakers who have spoken. but i want to voice my southern this not be rushed through without having supervisors kim's amendment if you want to get this right slow down. let it work through the process. i haven't really taken the time to look and read supervisor chu's amendment but i did kind of like what was saying. i can't say if i fully support those amendments. it's also good to see supervisor campos wisdom on those matters >> thank you. next speaker >> gadget. we're on record supporting supervisor wiener's proposal. we had a quick look at president chu's remarks we realso support the majority the only one we want to look at is the putting all the deals to the full board. maybe the smaller ones but on the whole he think they're very wise maementsdz we we looked to a vote on the full proposal. i would second the comments by matthew reagan this process has been going on a long time and it's time to have a vote and supervisor kim's proposal has been out there for review and have incorporation of, you know, some of the ideas in there. i especially like the focus on the making sure that the public notice piece is up and running fully i think that's key to all the proposals making sure that online piece is fully functioning and have an opportunity for publication as well. i want to emphasize that the center of cycling we do work with folks with feasibility and for the small community developers having a fair process in place it is key. everyone wants to have their say in having good public notification gives everyone their change to have their say. >> supervisors. we've all been shaq our his side with what's going on in washington about the background debates. it's developed into political posturing. i hope you won't let it having happen to this debate. i hope your efforts to - i hope you will continue to help the people whose efforts need you. this is the classic san francisco stereotype developer bad - community good that were in the 6 cases i've been involved with this is the city of san francisco attempting to make his residence. and a small amount of individuals have been adding money and time to the project. a million dollars in legal costs almost 3 years of delays while the community waited for a project they very much said. i hope the political insiders who use sequa to yield power over their communities that sequa won't derail this project. please remind us in those debates we don't have the power but we look to you for the power to help things stay balanced. thank you >> thank you very much. next speaker >> supervisors david. the rooms tenants association we support supervisor kim's legislation. we support it among other reasons because it's superior noting requirement. and show more respect for historic buildings. we were blind sited by the installation of two humanely signs on the post office recently. this is a gem of a building and was designed by the architect of the hotel. those signs demonstrate the clear need to strengthen the planning process and improve noting and respect historic buildings. we live across the street are from the long shore building where the developer wanted to destroy. i understood a planning commissioner said he would have voted against the building if he'd known the history. we need adequate noting of the show stopping information that's known throughout the planning process. we live directly across from the water front at the 75 howard street. this project would exceed the height limit by 70 percent i only found out about this project with when i ran into a port office on the street. the sequa process needs to be strengthened not weakened. >> thank you very much. >> howard paul speaking for 70 tomorrow. the sequa and as i participated in many projects. month projects as you know are not stag in another they evolve. and with some great minds as the 4 of you i think we can come to a progress that will be fair to all public. the public participation part of this is very important to s f p t. at one time financial interests had much more somewhat then many, many things in this city including from small to large projects. the kim legislation we have worked with and have found to be evolving but does have some argument that we like more than the other legislation. fully assessable to the general public and particularly to the average citizen and disadvantaged community. sequa is only one part of the community i would urge the board to look at all the elements and make them clear not just sequa but zoning and many issues have come to it. >> thank you very much. >> i'm i'm with the san francisco preservation and aquatic park majors i'm going to finish what i said a couple of weeks ago. if we were forced to have an appeal ready within thirty days we would have lost our historic resources. there was an 80 years old building that was approved for dpoogs. we didn't know wisp only neighbors who would lose an 80-year-old building. the developer solid us out he do a lot of dirty tricks. we went to the planning department and tried to find out why they were cutting the hitching i historic building. and finally we talked to someone and they said file a sequa appeal. so we saved the home. so if we only have thirty days from the ideal we would have lost that building. so i you're going to you really consider that first approval as being something that's very limiting to some of us who are professionals in this preservation and really take a look at kim legislation and take the best elements of all the legislation and wait until we have a change to look at it everything. >> next speaker. >> hi i'm roland. i'm here representing the preservation. so first of all, sincerely thank you for sponsoring those. supervisor chu difficult compromise i want to refocus on the guerilla in the room and that's the planning department. they need help. they've had 10 years if not more to establish procedures around sequa. hire an consultant. now the reason why they need help is they're under manned they need all kinds of help. this is an administrative procedural topic. how the e r o project has changed give them the assistance to define scope and substantial modification. give them the assistance they're so obviously craving. they don't want anything that's going to cause them more work and i don't blame them they're under staffed. when 869 north point came up it was because of her the planners were able to identify the flaws in the process. we've achieved things together one appeal for sequa that's fantastic. and a thank you, mr. brady. >> thank you we're the independent partner. the proposed legislation before you is limited to its impacts on parks. how to improve our parks is always challenging to balance the priorities. we do have a gap in how residents can appeal certain decisions made under sequa. president chiu i am encouraged by your proposed amendments. supervisor wiener's legislation has been thoroughly vetted. we believe this legislation officer a significant improvement over the statue quo. we believe that gid sequa mrojz will be able to proceed in a timely manner. we've heard from commits about parks and other issues impacting our systems. and we look forward to continue to work with constituents as those projects are selected, designed and implemented. supervisor wiener's proposed sequa reform is in the right direction. >> i'm with the sadly commission. i want to ask you wait until supervisor kim's and wiener's legislation are side by side. and from i don't know if two weeks is enough but we definitely need more time. it's not just about developers it's about what our community is going to look like. this is about supervisor kim and against developers h that has nothing to do with that or community groups are brainwashing our constituents we're actually helping the planning department by educating the constituent they refuse to educate we actually good talk to the community and have meetings to educate our community about what's going on and the community will decide whether they like thing or not. this body does not see because they're not coming out to our neighborhood. it's important that we have the continuance for 2 or 4 weeks won't hurt the legislation. but whatever comes out of this legislation will hurt argue community forever please take your time. >> hello, i'm here to support supervisor wiener's legislation. supervisor wiener did reach out to the community. i don't understand all the things of sequa but i've witnessed loot good projects. i think we can all say that sequa is used as a political tool big or small and this was never the intent of sequa. project sometimes is good. of course, i want to know about a large project >> wait there is an audio devise on and it's - oh, it is - looks like there are headphones too. yeah. why don't we get >> we're having some technical audio did the if you could. >> there's no rush, want to get it right. sorry to interrupt you >> i need 3 minutes. >> okay terrific. >> of course, i want to know about a large pet project but those will still have a review there are should be a deadline and it's important to meet a deadline. i appreciate that supervisor kim wants to see the sequa approved. especially owners of older homes we also talked about family flight and while personally agree that financial forms are the reason for flight. and many people talk about protecting rent control but creating more bureaucracy is going to encourage flight from our city. this will lead to blithe neighborhood we can't afford those processes. am i done? >> that is the bell. >> thank you. >> thank you very much. >> afternoon. the legislation i have 3 concerns we want clarity definition circulate. the legislation is based on the issuance of a basis vague description and i want you to see some of those vague descriptions. this is a project and it's new single-family residents and it's vaguely. now those are all scopes. vertically extended feet those are vague considered scope of the project. as you know it permits a building permit. some of the things are mechanic and electrical projects and it's adena for that one. etc. when you have no addendum and vague descriptions you're going to disagreeing have 0 problem. maybe they need to be tweaked because sometimes in the end their 0 full permits and i want a definition. believe and planning have different dings and permit are set out, too early. the permit was withdrawn in 2011 it was filed 40 in 2008 if we filled the first permit in 2008 it would be too early. >> actually before we get the next speaker let me call the final batch of speakers. >> (calling names) those are the calls i called - cards i called. >> hello, i'm robert woods i'm the chairman of the black human rights leadership of san francisco. we have a different type of problem in our community. our problem is we talking about a lot of things that you do that in terms of notification is done by commuter and we're looking in our community we don't have a lot of commuters, a commuter is a luxury. we when you start talking about letting the community know and you put it on community you have not done a darn thing in our community. the target is we got the large developers coming out to the community and they don't talk to the black community they come down here and talk to you guys. we get the news it's a done deal. we like to see the community get involved in the process in terms of - in terms of in the of those things i just noticed you there's not a lot of commuters in your community. and also, we looking at some kind of