Transcripts For SFGTV BOS Replay Special Rules Committee 71416 20160728

Supervisor cohen and supervisor yee and we would like to thank sfgtv. Mr. Clerk, are there any announcements . Yes. Please silence all cell phones and Electronic Devices and submitted to the clerk and items will be on the and items will be on the next board of supervisors agenda unless otherwise stated. Thank you. Can you please call item 1. Item 1 is appointment to appoint a member to the Treasure Island Development Authority to the Citizens Advisory Committee for an indefinite term. There are two applicants. Thank you. We have citizens here for the one see the and i guess we can start with david brentlinger. Good morning. Thank you supervisors for having me here today and this is about the Treasure Island Development Authority Citizens Advisory Committee vacant see the from suzanne kims exit. I know her. She introduced me to Treasure Island a number of years ago and the origin of my interest in this position. Treasure island as you know is a critical part of the development of San Francisco, and its a complicated project in land used issues and toxic clean up and transportation and this position calls for somebody inp r expertise in land use, architecture, planning and transportation, cultural resources, historic preservation, geotechnical, real estate and financing and large scale management, wetland management, Natural Resource preservation, environmental remediation. I can tell you i have been involved in all of those things in a substantial way. The communities that i built now have thousands literally thousands of people live thrg and thousands of jobs generated in place in those communities, so i would also like to point out that i have substantial involvement in San Francisco city improvements. Im involved in San Francisco wholesale Produce Market expansion and renovation. I am recently started work with the Planning Department rail yard and i2 rail boulevard study, and more recently been a cofounder of the san franciscans for sports and recreation. Yesterday as a result of that i was able to go through a list of 25 city Tennis Courts that need resurfacing. We secured funding for that as well as additional recreational additions to the citys inventory. In the course of that i was also able to realize that Treasure Island has some Little League baseball diamonds that were at risk so having said all of that i just realized that mr. Tepper who is here is deeply involved in recreation at Treasure Island, and i think in particular baseball . [inaudible] okay. So in any event im willing to defer my position to mr. Tepper because of his closer relationship to Treasure Island so i didnt want to take up the committees time this morning but i wanted to support the effort at Treasure Island and continue to volunteer to work for the city in whatever capacity is worthwhile. Well thank you very much. Thats very kind of you. Okay. Then i will not proceed with any other questions and maybe we can go to mr. Tepper as the next applicant. Very well. Thank you for the application. [inaudible] off mic supervisor tang, supervisor cohen good morning. Supervisor yee nice to see you again. As mr. Brentlinger said i have been involved with San Francisco Little League and we have fields on Treasure Island. There is also a amount of wonderful fields for lacrosse, soccer, football and flag football and so forth, and the concern of a lot of us not just Little League is that these are really the premier fields in San Francisco. When we started San Francisco Little League in 1996 for the first three years we had to play our home games in sausalito and our away games in mill valley because no San Francisco fields met Little League specifications, safety and so forth, and around 1999 or 20001 of our dads who was assemblymans administrative aid said we should try the Treasure Island Department Corporation and agreed to rent a field for 1 dollar a year and now its three Little League itself although i am no longer directly involved so im not speaking for Little League. Now has three diamond and one team of 14 children to over a hundred teams, almost 2,000 players. We have girls soft ball and a strong Challenger Program and the Little Leagues program for disabled children so my interest is to ensure that the fields that exist are either maintained or traded off so that we dont necessarily have to have the same number of fields on Treasure Island. We might be able to replace one baseball diamond with something in San Francisco. I am open to that. I dont have any interest in stopping the development of Treasure Island but i think its only fair that something is so helpful for family live to have a Recreational Area for your children that is safe, charming and a wonderful place be maintained, and so i hope that i will get the appointment. Thank you very much. And i think its a really great perspective youre able to bring to this body because as we all know theres a lot of changes happening and we cant lose sight of the recreational and open space facilities on Treasure Island. Thank you very much. Thank you. Do we have any questions or comments . Okay. Were going to open up this item to Public Comment. I have one card and if you would like to come up for this item please come forward. Good morning supervisor supervisors. Im a transportation guy but i also have a daughter who has Downs Syndrome and its through this i got involved in the concept of challenger baseball which is baseball for kids with disabilities and worked with jessie 15 years ago to establish the Program Within San Francisco Little League and i have been associated with it, and know jessie since that time. We all know about the Development Plans for Treasure Island but think mostly in terms of the Residential Development and the potential of the museum, but much of the island is open space and a center is part of the Development Program for the island. We all know that the city has the scarcity of new baseball fields. We all know the battles by the fields by the beach and mission park and within sites in the city so Treasure Island represents valuable and invaluable resource for siting playing fields for particularly for youths in athletics and appropriately to maintain and retained as a resource for the city. From that perspective i think jessie brings an invaluable perspective to us in the development of the island and something appropriately represented on this group. Thank you very much. Any other members of the public to comment to item 1. Seeing none. Public comment is now closed. It looks like we have one applicant for the one see the so i would be happy to forward jesse tepper to see the nine of this body with positive recommendation to the full board. Thank you. I will join you supervisor tang and joyfully accepting and moving the motion forward with a positive recommendation to the full board. All right. Great so we will do that and we will take it without objection. [gavel] item two please. Item number 2 say hearing to consider appointing one member, term ending march 19, 2019 to the child Care Planning and Advisory Council. There is one seat, one applicant. Thank you. And is Fonda Davidson here today . Please come on up. Good morning supervisors. Im here as the nominee for a vacant seat for district 8 to serve on the child Care Planning and Advisory Council committee. I have attended the committee for many, many years as the director of Cross Cultural Family Center and have participated on several of the subcommittees primarily the Work Force Committee and at times the policy and legislation committee, and i look forward to continuing to support the work of city in serving the children and families of San Francisco and particularly to address the needs of the child care professionals in our city, and i am happy to answer any questions that you may have. Okay. Supervisor yee are you here for this item in okay. I just wanted to be here for this item. Fonda is somebody ive known like forever it seems like, and i cant you know just sitting here thinking when was it about Cross Culturally . You have been there a long time and i know you were somewhere else and shes like the perfect candidate to be on cpac. Shes one of the most knowledgeable individuals in San Francisco in this field. Shes dedicated her whole life in trying to improve the systems throughout San Francisco. I worked with her. I worked against her. We do battle but shes always there for the kids and the families so i certainly would support a person like Fonda Davidson to be appointed. Okay. Great. Thank you supervisor yee and just reading and understanding your background too i know you have a huge expertise and have a lot to contribute to this committee, so and i appreciate your comments about kind of the focus area you have coming up which is around the actual providers, and how we really need to provide more for them so i look forward to working on those issues with supervisor yee and my other colleagues as well so at this time i dont see other questions and comments so were going to take Public Comment on item two. Any members of the public that wish to speak on item two . Seeing none. Public comment is now closed. [gavel] and can we get a motion on this item then . Sure thank you supervisor tang. I want to make a motion with a positive recommendation. All right. We will move fond to understand to see the eight on the child Care Planning and Advisory Council. We will take without objection. Congratulations. Thank you very much. Item 3 please. Item number 3 is a hearing to Initiative Ordinance of four or more supervisors for the election Initiative Ordinance for the administrative code for the neighborhood crime unit in the Police Department and active when the controller certifies that the department is at full staffing level in the city charter and levels to the assigned unit. The author is here, supervisor wiener. Thank you very much madam chair and supervisor cohen thank you for cosining with myself and supervisor farrell to place this neighborhood crime policing measure on the ballot. Colleagues we have a epidemic of crime in the city and this would establish the neighborhood crime unit so we have a true focus on addressing these issues. This unit will be tasked with implementing foot patrols and working proactively with the community to address neighborhood specific crimes. I worked closely with the Mayors Office as well as the San Francisco Police Department to craft this measure. Colleagues as you know are aware we have seen a spike actually not a spike but explosion of property crime in our city. Data from the Police Department shows a huge increase in property crimes particularly burglary, theft, auto break ins and bike theft. I held a hearing in january and at that hearing the Police Department reported an 18 increase in property crimes from 2014 to 2015. We have seen a dramatic increase in property crimes in the last five or six years. The recent civil grand jury report on auto burglaries found that it occurs in San Francisco more than 70 times everyday which is an 11 increase from 2014 to 2015, and just this week colleagues at the Land Use Committee i held a hearing on bike theft and in San Francisco its grawd dupled since stwaw 11 and threatened under mine the policy of people to get around via bike. I know every one of of us hears everyday from the constituents that we have a crime problem in our neighborhood that we need more foot patrols and more Police Presence in the neighborhoods to prevent crime in addition to addressing the crime once its happened but its not just about cracking down on crime and community sfpding is what this is about and its about Building Trust with the community. When officers are in the beats and riding bikes and in the neighborhood they develop relationships with residents, with merchants and all members of the community so its not just about responding to the crime. Its about preventing crime before it happens. The neighborhood crime unit will be activated when our city reaches its charter mandated staffing minimum of 1971 officers which were expected to reach by the end of next year. We have been working very hard every year in our budget process to fund Police Academy classes to get us back up to the minimum staffing level. At that point and time no less than 3 of all Police Officers will be assigned to the neighborhood crime unit. This unit will be tasked with prioritizing enforcement regarding crimes like burglary, auto break ins and theft, vandalism, bike theft while enforcing other laws. In addition to policing responsibilities the neighborhood crime unit will be tasked with collaboratively working with other city agencies like the department of public health, Human Services agency and the department of homelessness and Supportive Housing to address unlawful street behavior issues with a goal of transitioning people off the streets and into housing and services and we were specific in this measure that issues that relate to people being in crisis, people needing help that the goal of this unit is not to criminalize anyone, not to bring anyone to jail but to help people into service and off the streets and the measure mandates that the neighborhood crime unit work with these other city agencies to try to help people who are in crisis who need housing and other service. These officers will also assist with 911 and 311 calls for Service Related to neighborhood crimes. The measure also creates tran transparency and accountability about metrics about data crime and the efforts to combat the crimes with required reports to the police commission. This requires the Police Department to create a comprehensive written policy governing the assignment and conduct of the neighborhood crime unit that will be reviewed at minimum annually by the police commission. The policy will be required to include the following procedures for officers assigned to the unit, a list of penal code employee code sections that serve as a focus for the unit and the list shall be composedd and updated annually between collaboration district captains, Community Members, organizations and unit officers, and then annual report to the police commission. Colleagues we know that Community Policing works but we need to commit to it and formalize it or it goes away and we have seen that over and over again with the lack of beat officers in the neighborhood and the resulting explosion of property crime so we need this commitment. We need to commit to the residents as we grow the police ranks which we want to do at least some of us on the board of supervisors want to do those resources will be directed to making the communities safe for everyone so colleagues i look forward to the discussion today and to making the case to the voters in november about the importance of this measure. Thank you. Thank you very much. Colleagues any questions, comments . Supervisor yee. Thank you. First of all i want to appreciate that were all focus or many people are focused on this particular issue. As you know i have been well, maybe you dont know for the last year or so i have been working with the Police Department to address these very same issues within the district 7. District 7 like some of the other districts have seen the explosion of these crimes that supervisor wiener has described so eloquently, and so i also have had hearings at city hall around this issue, twice, and i continue to set up Community Meetings with our Police Captains and bring in other organizations into the meetings such as supervisor tang has done with sf safe and the da to have a discussion with the Community Members to see to not only talk about the problems but what do we see as potential solutions so through that mechanism we have been able to identify certain strategies that the Community Felt was the way to go. For instance they thought they needed more help from sf safe in the budget process i added more money into the budget. They said it would be really helpful to have some Funding Sources to purchase cameras if neighbors get a grant for it and promise to monitor it so theres money in the budget for that as a Pilot Project for district 7, so i think what i am getting at were doing things i have been talking to our three different Police Captains that covers the district plus the chief, and i had several meetings already in trying to come up with strategies and were getting close to them. My concern here is that i hope that whatever we come up with, and it seems very decentralized, the approach that we will be using, that this particular ballot measure doesnt take away our efforts that we would have solidified by the time november comes around, so the in fact i mean like tomorrow i am actually walking through ocean avenue with the Police Captain because of a recent rash of break ins of our Small Businesses, so again i am trying to get the police connected to our community as much as possible. I was hoping that the chief would be here but hes not. Maybe supervisor wiener could answer. Im just curious you know as we all know as we debated probably a year ago, so that it would take a little while to get to the 1971 and really is projecting as you indicated next year some time that we will reach the charter number of 1971 Police Officers, so heres my concern and i know this is not a debate whether this goes through or not, but im going to use this opportunity to have a discussion. If for instance were successful in getting strategies going its really more neighborhood based or Police Station based, and the strategies that want to use for their area they feel like its going to work for that area. Every area is going to be a little different, so you know and this is going on and okay we have 1970 officers right now and its still going on and all of a sudden we reach 1971 lets say 1972. All of a sudden my calculations says that were actually mandating the police chief to actually pull 60 officers from somewhere, mostlily from the individual Police Stations to create this unit, so this i believe 11 no, ten Police Stations, which means that each station could lose up to six officers or more or whatever, and thats a big deal for a Police Station because i have been fighting hard to get more Police Officers in these stations, so thats one concern, and then where are you going to get the Police Officers from to create this . Yes the number are there but these people are already assigned. Thats one concern that i have. The other concern, as i have been talking first with chief suhr and cheap chief chaplain and several now and years ago everything was centralized and found it was working as well because the strategies were one size fits all and they started to decentralize. I spoke to the former chief about this and said one of the reasons they decentralize today they wanted captain to have autonomy to find solutions. So this seems to move back to centralizing and one of the concerns on the west side every time they centralize units that the west side you see [inaudible] ignored. The crimes youre talking about theyre a lot of [inaudible] in place and if you start looking at the numbers of car thefts and Everything Else then certainly even though its real high on the west side compared to tenderloin or other areas its much higher in other areas. What does it mean that were going to lose the attention we would have gotten if it was based in the Police Stations. So those are concerns that i really do have and i want to try to understand. I am hoping whatever happens with this ballot measure i mean if its successful that it doesnt put you know, reverse our efforts. Supervisor wiener did you want to respond first and [inaudible] sure, absolutely. No problem. I will respond after you. Thank you supervisor cohen. So to supervisor yee through the chair i appreciate the questions. I dont think that i think what were proposing here is going to improve the approach to neighborhood crime at the neighborhood level including on the west side because the approach we have now particularly in light of the under staffing is clearly not consistently working otherwise we wouldnt have this tidal wave of property crime that we have seen over the last five years. This is not about taking away officers from Police Stations. The officers in this unit will be in our neighborhoods. Theyre not going to be you know some sort of wall between them and district stations. They are working day in and day out with the officers assigned to particular stations and it will be a collaborative working relationship and the measure specifically mandates that a district captains in addition to Community Members be involved in sort of the planning and the prioritization in terms of these units. In terms of centralization versus decentralization yes this is a new bureau within the Police Department doesnt mean the officers are all the hall of justice. Theyre in the neighborhoods and thats the whole point here to be pushing more officers into our neighborhoods and the challenge that we have now, and i think in neighborhoods like some of the west side neighborhoods, and there are other neighborhoods in the east side that falls into this, it tends to be neighborhoods that are experienced higher levels of crime get understandably especially violence crime and more focus of the Police Department and thats not a criticism but a reality and in mission station they get more focus because theres more particularly Violent Crime in the mission compared to noe valley and by having a formal focus on neighborhood Crime Prevention and addressing neighborhood crime and beat cops i think we will see more Police Officers in our neighborhoods. I dont think this is going to under mine the west side. I mean already today in terms of staffing of the district stations bay view station or mission station or northern station for example have more Police Officers assigned to them than terra bell because of crime levels and already staffing decisions are made based on crime levels. This isnt going to under mine the west side. I think it will benefit the west side because we know the west side is experiencing enormous amount of property crime as well, but in the end just to be very, very clear under no matter the model we use and the revised model or officers where the sole focus is neighborhood crime issues the only way were going to fundamentally address effectively our crime issues is with adequate staffing in the Police Department. Our Police Department is under staffed. It has been under staffed for years. We are working very hard to rebuild it and we need to get it back up to the 1971 but honestly 1971 was a full staffing number that was set when Dianne Feinstein was their in the 80s when we had fewer people when we had areas of the city that are now neighborhoods that didnt exist then and 1971 is no longer a valid minimum staffing level and thats why the board of supervisors on a vote last year i believeet krad a new policy that due to population growth and comparing to other cities full staffing is at least 2200. We authored the resolution and got it passed and supervisor yee you didnt support that resolution. We continue to have debates at the board whether the resolution is applicable. It is. It was passed by the board. Its the policy now and we need to be getting Staffing Levels up so we actually have enough officers so the neighborhood crime unit is well staffed and so that every station is well staffed because thats how were going to prevent crime so we have to keep the momentum going and every year at the board of supervisors there is an effort to tear down this down and not keep increasing the Police Staffing and we need to keep the momentum up. Thank you. Comprehensive. Thank you. Welcome. Supervisor cohen. Thank you to the Committee Supervisor yee. I am listening to the remarks and trying to understand better your areas of concerns. I think i hear two. One is a legitimate one that policing that is happening in your entire district youre concerned if this specific crime what are we calling this . Crime unit. Safety crime unit. Safety crime unit is created and pulling other resources from your district. Is that correct . The legislation says that once you reach 1971 at least 3 of the police force will be assigned to this particular unit thats outlined which equals to about 60 Police Officers and so this unit, if the unit didnt exist prior to the 1971 level then at some point when you when it gets triggered its also like not that you have 60 new officers on top and might have one officer and have to find 60 officers to be assigned to this unit. It could be done i think supervisor wiener may have described how it could be done, but that was my concern that that in creating this that all of a sudden things arent working. Some of the things actually our Police Stations in seven, some of the strategies are beginning to work. The stats for those particular crimes have dropped quite a bit. Which strategies are working in district 7 . They have focus on those crimes. They have certain people assigned to it. Ive encouraged we lost both of our beat officers for instance since i have been a supervisor and i encouraged them to be reinstated like when you lost them where did they go . The Police Department okay. What happened i dont want to pretend i run the Police Department. I work with them, i encourage and support them but for whatever reason when they put it off they said they were their level of ros were officers were low and put is it off and we all supported the increase of Police Academy classes so more recently gone up again slowly and i said well f that is the case then please reassign them. I talked to the chief and the captains and they were able to do it and i think it goes a long ways. Im hoping that my meeting on ocean avenue tomorrow and walk with the captain, so those are the things that i am trying to do with the Police Officers and the Police Stations to work with them in our communities to bring the gap and break down the barriers. I actually went to some of the businesses yesterday to let them know, you know. I know there has been a lot of break ins in your store fronts and what i want is that the Police Captain of terra vel station for ocean avenue to understand your concerns and how we can Work Together, and two of them actually told me theres no point. I dont trust them. You know the same thing theres not that trust so i am just trying to bridge it, so between the Police Stations and what i am trying to do seems like were trying to develop trust so that the people one of the things i teld all of the Community Meetings and thats a new thing. I didnt do that with the Police Captains in the past but this past year we had three already and we have two more scheduled, and they some things that we hear about all the time. Its not part of the dna of most residents that if somebody break the window in a car a lot of people dont report it, so by the time somebody does really report it, and i tell people i tell the Police Station. This is an issue and they look at records. Well theres only two people that reported it. No, i heard 20 people. I heard stories so they go out and tell them the same story i tell them okay thank you. So these are some of the strategies were taking. You know i again im not the Police Department. I was hoping they would be here to give you more information. I had several meetings with chapter chaplain already to make sure that i dont lose the momentum chief suhr. I mean the captain. I got it. This is a hearing item so no action is taken so i am grateful that supervisor yee cares enough hes busy cares enough to come to committee and come and articulate his concerns. My questions are not meant to be antagonizing but i am trying to understand better your position because if there is an opportunity to make the legislation stronger i think this is our job so this topic were talking about is the Initiative Ordinance that could go to voters or will be going to voters that would create a neighborhood crime unit within the Police Department, a neighborhood crime unit, so what i hear so you all know i represent southeast San Francisco. We have a legacy of crime, and i have three captains that i work with, and bay view ingleside and southern captains and youre right. Each captain has their own individual philosophy. They know their district and territory so they deploy their officers appropriately. My experience i get an overwhelming number of emails from people across all of San Francisco about crime issues for whatever reason they come and they bring them to me, and i have heard from constituents from district 7 and one thing that is consistent youre absolutely right. Foot patrol, beat cops are desired, that relationship, and you know what is also important . Multilingual officers that are able to communicate with everyone so i am thinking about high traffic areas that are similar, ocean avenue, san bruno avenue, certainly third street, certain parts of the Design District around the geneva corridor as well. Theyre all areas its beneficial to have officers that speak at least two languages. I guess the primary languages could be english and spanish excuse me, english, spanish and also chinese, and people want to see that camaraderie and certainly in the mono lingual chinese parts of the community they like to have a Police Officer they can see and touch and when you have that presence that of which the neighborhood crime unit would also be significantly creating is that that creates that relationship so people have the confidence to report crime, and make anonymous tips, so im grateful were having this conversation because i dont think we everyone or one person or neighborhood has the complete answer when it come to the Law Enforcement and Community Policing. What i am hearing something that is yeferl universal we all want Community Policing and in the hearing and i am trying to find out where the objections are with the concerns of the neighborhood crime unit . So thats really what i am trying to hear and listen for. Yeah, and again hopefully i raised the concern. I think supervisor wiener answered it. You know i think part of it is to raise these concerns and i didnt come in here to debate whether it should be on the ballot oh no, i know that. I just want to be clear. Its important for me to feel like the effort i am spending a lot of time, like a lot of us, on these issues in the district, and i dont want my efforts in which this is not me telling the police what to do. Its more like what do you need from me to help you, and thats my approach, and they have appreciated it. They continue to want to dialogue. In fact more recently rather than meeting with individual captains which i have been doing which wasnt as effective, commander maddox i spoke with her and we were just talking and she says why dont you meet with all three at the same time . I never thought it of it and we had a great meeting because we were able to focus on this and talking about coordination and so forth, so you know thank you commander maddox for asking the three captains to be in my office with her to discuss these issues so thats all i am saying that many of the supervisors i am sure im not the only one that does this has focus on this and i just you know, want to make my efforts and other peoples efforts within the district and working with the police its not lost if this ballot measure passes. Thats why i raised some of the issues. Supervisor wiener. Thank you. And i appreciate all the issues that supervisor yee has raised in terms of the challenges we face in our neighborhoods which are probably in every neighborhood in the city, and this measure will not in anyway under mine efforts to sway those legitimate concerns. I think this will help in terms of the very basic day to day neighborhood and Public Safety problems that people are just at their whits end in terms of seeing things and experiencing crimes and wondering where the heck are the officers walking beats . Why is this happening . Why dont we have more officers in our neighborhoods . And this measure will help have some sort of discipline in our up staffing process to make sure we have a focus on the neighborhood level so just to be clear in terms of taking away from stations, which will absolutely not happen, it wasnt that long ago, maybe a couple years ago our department had fewer than 1700 active duty officers, fewer than 1700. We now have a little bit more than 1800 and so as of today we have just over 1800. We will then claw our way up to 1971 assuming that something bad doesnt happen in this building which is always a possibility, and when we get to 1971 there are 60 of the officers will become purely neighborhood focused in all of the neighborhoods so 1910 will not be in that unit. We will still have more officers in our regular and every other unit than we have today. Hundreds more than we had a few years ago but 60 of those officers are dedicated only to neighborhood crime issues, working with the stations, having those strategies that are neighborhood by neighborhood but also understanding that some of the neighborhood issues are universal. They exist in every neighborhood so this will force the department to make sure that as we up staff the department we are [inaudible] staff the department is a better phrase taking a disciplined approach with the beat cops in the neighborhood. Thank you. Thank you. Supervisor mar. Thank you. Colleagues i had this hearing i had to testify in earlier so i am sorry i am coming to this discussion a little bit late. I share some of the concerns that supervisor yee has raised, and i know that we need to be strategic in how we utilize Police Resources for the most serious issues and sometimes with the zone enforcement strategy for example focusing on a couple of districts or neighborhoods where the highest crime is happening is really strategic and important, but like supervisor yee i do feel like this isnt necessary to go to the ballot because it can be done administratively or with the interim chief chaplains leadership and strategy as well. I do also worry that whether it was zone enforcement strategy, which focused officers and resources into some key areas, but then left other districts without or with fewer resources to be dealing with the issues that we had to deal with as well. Bumping some crime like car break ins and other things to the districts that werent part of the zone enforcement strategy. Another example with super bowl policing which arguably was important and necessary but again it left some of the outer lying districts without enough resources. I work with our two captains in my district on foot patrols and other issues that i think need the resources. They need resources to be able to keep our neighborhoods safe with their own district specific strategies. The 60 officers or however many that would be part of the unit its not clear if its pulling them away and what resources we would have in each of the Police Districts. I think fledge fledge flexibility as supervisor yee mentioned is key to have and the centralized approach might leave some of the districts not just the west side one but outer districts away from the zone enforcement strategies with fewer resources. The last thing i will say i conducted with the budget analyst study of the resources going to the Police Department on homeless calls and i know that one of the goals of this new unit its creating yet another unit within the Police Department to address the 911 and 311 calls and when we analyze the services to the Police Department a huge number were on complaints about various issues of Homeless People or people without homes and i think it was 18. 6 million was according to the report spent on dealing with various issues like calls about Homeless People and i think even some of the Police Officers cited in the report were saying they rarely resulted in a citation or any action and i am wondering if this unit might be used also to be more wasteful on resources to investigate a call but not result in anything on a homeless person . I think strategic approaches are right and transparency and accountability and use of data is right but i think this pulls us away from the existing approaches by the captains of each of the Police Districts to address these issues and i worry by placing Something Like this on the ballot doesnt make it better, in fact makes it less flexible for the captains to work with this as we create another unit within the Police Department and thats my 2 cents and i have concerns and i appreciate the supervisors concern about neighborhood safety but i dont think this is the right way to address it. Thank you supervisor mar. Supervisor wiener would you like to open up this item to Public Comment now . I would be delighted madam chair. All right. We will open Public Comment for item 3. I have one Public Comment card. Good morning jordan Gwendolyn Davis gender rights active. I oppose this neighborhood crime unit boondoggle. No, lets cut the bs. The appropriate term is broken windows policing unit. Last monday i came to city hall with our community who spoke out in crowded several of your offices. Also you may remember last month electeds were booed off the stage. Why do you think that happened . Because the broken Windows Initiative including this one and the u did you nottant antiencampus initiative and attempts to hurt the homeless over the years. Its reached a boiling point. Our group and [inaudible] over gentrification and transgender youth and black and brown and disabled put in jail, a place where rape and misgend gendering is the norm and pressured by the police by homeward bound. To the supervisor please withdraw the cruel unnecessary and redundant measures and the encampus measure. Youre using the donald trump play book to get wealthy people to vote and this is awful and just do the right thing and remove this. Is there any additional Public Comment . Seeing none madam chair we can close Public Comment. All right. Public comment is closed on item 3. [gavel]. If we can get a motion to file the hearing. So moved. Take without objection. I apologize okay. Well, we have our letters here from the controllerree office and reallocation of existing costs. Item 4 please. Item 4 is Initiative Ordinance for the planning code for requiring use use for replacement of production, distribution, repair, Institutional Community and arts activities uses and Planning Department under ceqa and election to be held on november 8,. Thank you. I dont see anyone from supervisor kims office and wait a few minutes and perhaps someone can talk and speak on this item. Thank you chair tang. I apologize i thought there would be more than one speaker for the previous item so were now joined by supervisor kim. Thank you chair tang and thank you to the public that are here for item 4. I want to thank my colleagues for hearing this legislation in rules committee this past week and providing comment and thank you to the public for weighing in on this important conversation how we work to preserve production distribution and repair zoning here in San Francisco, arts and Community Gathering spaces. As we balance what we all agree as much needed growth particularly residential and Office Growth here in San Francisco. With the amendments that have been made and further will be introduced today i think that this legislation will strike the right balance between competing needs amongst all of the different uses we want to see here in San Francisco. San francisco is a city and it is a city with a diversity of people and the character of neighborhood that makes the city great. We are in a moment of time where we feel were at risk of losing San Francisco special places and the people that depend on the spaces to work, play, mark art and receive services. For several years now the board has heard countless stories of organizations, nonprofit organizations that cannot compete in todays hot office market. In a report by the Northern California grant [inaudible] Association Two out of three organizations throughout the bay area will have to make a decision whether they can stay or moving in the next five years. The citys Art Commission well nearly 600 artists have stated that either live or that live in the city found that 70 of respondents have been displaced or were being displaced from the work place, home or both. As for the 30 that wasnt displaced potential displacement in the future was a high concern. We are also losing production distribution and repair spaces throughout the city as well. We are losing auto mechanic garages, spaces that repair and produce, and also we are losing space to limited enforcement that the city provides to ensuring that zoning is properly followed. But it is not too late to do something and this legislation attempts to address what were seeing today as the rapid loss of production distribution repair and arts in San Francisco. We need to make sure as the city builds it does it in the right way and the board had many conversations about the need for building more housing and building Affordable Housing. In fact this year i sponsored a measure that would increase having Market Rate Developers build 25 Affordable Housing on site, but developers also need to know if youre building a projected where theres currently space for workers, artists and nonprofits that we expect that these spaces be replaced in the future. This legislation and the new requirements that we are proposing today are one way to ensure were building a healthier and more balanced neighborhood. The legislation provides clear rules and expectations for replacing the loss of space for people to work, make and appreciate art and provide services to the community. At the same time it does provide the Planning Department and the future board of supervisors as suggested by this rules committee the opportunity to strengthen the legislation in the future should the need arise allowing legislators to make changes to this ballot measure. It also strikes the right balance by allowing developers to build but making clear that the loss of space needs to be replaced. It strikes the right balance by addressing the crisis were seeing in the neighborhoods that are facing rapid changes and displacement and respects other neighborhoods process and to craft future legislation to address the specific nuisances of their neighborhood and i do want to appreciate supervisor cohen and supervisor tang that took on the initiative to support and balance distribution and repair in the respective districts but we also want to by striking a balance we dont want to pit pdr and nonprofit and Affordable Housing against one either. Theyre all uses that we want to see more of and that we want to preserve. We need tools to ensure that San Franciscos limited space is available to people of different backgrounds, different Employment Opportunities and different needs, so colleagues i want to thank you for your consideration of this legislation. I appreciate the thoughtful conversation that has been occurring over the last few weeks and i do have a number of amendments that i would like to submit to the rules committee today based on the feedback that we got over this past week so chair tang should i allow for comments from Committee Members or introduce the amendments . I think we spoke at length previously so you can go into the amendments and that is fine. Sure. One is just a grammatical correction page two and line 13. In recent years the diversity has becomed threatened versus is threatened. We also had to make another clarification change on page three line eight. These pressures although citywide are felt acutely in San Francisco sought of market and i want to add mission neighborhoods. In number 5 per suggestion of members of this rules committee we want to strike in page five lines 22 through the following page 6 line four that we strike the requiring of conditional use authorization subject to the following requirements to preserve the existing stock space for pdr and art and Community Use and the project result in Building Space and pdr feet at least 5,000 feet and in the districts requiring currently use for the amendment can you describe what the amendment would do . Sure. Were striking the need for a conditional use for 100 Affordable Housing if there is replacement of pdr on site. I dont believe thats the correct one. Im sorry. Deputy City Attorney or supervisor kim. Its the one you just read i think doesnt have anything to do with the 100 . Give me one second. Im sorry. Okay. Deputy City Attorney. I might be able to give some clarity. That strike through was because as was discussed at the last hearing the way that this currently is drafted the requirement would apply as a blanket requirement for any conversion in the entirety of these enumerated plan areas and the replacement requirement only applies to the specific Zoning Districts. This amendment is intended to align those two up so theres no longer a blanket requirement for cu regardless whether subject to the replacement requirement. Instead this amendment would tie the two together so the cu requirement is only required in the u numerated Zoning Districts of sally et cetera, listed in the subsection so if you need that you need a cu and otherwise youre not subject to that requirement. Okay great. So if i am hearing correctly everything is aligned and only the planned areas described by this measure, the cu requirement and the replacement requirement apply to all the same places . Okay. Great. Thank you. My apologize. Thank you to the City Attorney for that clarification. We do however put in an amendment later in the legislation that does sorry, actually address that particular amendment regarding a cu and 100 Affordable Housing where pdr is replaced and i am open to discussions with the rules committee on that one because i know that was a point of debate. We also on page eight provide several other exemptions based on the discussion that occurred at rules Committee Last week, so on lines one through four any property under the jurisdiction of the port or recreation and Park Commission and all redevelopment plan areas as effective july 1, 2016 and zoned p public after that date so if youre zoned parcel p today or if youre zoned p in the future you will get an exemption from this legislation. Supervisor mar, did you have a question . Yeah. I wanted to thank supervisor kim and april for listening to the comments at the last Committee Meeting. I wanted to thank supervisor tang for raising the issue of 100 of Affordable Housing and Sophie Hayward as well and i am appreciative of that. I am curious what was changed in the grand fathering as brought up in the committee . And also what potential future trailing legislation may be coming . So what were proposing although there wasnt report at rules committee for this amendment is that we do agree that projects that have submitted an ee by the date of which this legislation was introduced on june 14 that you should allow some flexibility for those projects. What were proposing along with our stakeholders is that we do an exemption for any project that converts less than 15,000 square feet of pdr in Community Arts activity use and any projects building under 25 units to be consistent with a threshold we are instituted in proposition c which passed via voters this past june, and also what we will be proposing although i dont believe we will have support at rules committee today is that instead of a complete grandfathering of the projects above this limit of pdr ask the larger projects to replace 40 versus 100 of the pdr on site. Thank you so much supervisor kim, and i know kate from sf made raised issues and i am wondering what the communications have been with her . And i see a letter from spur in my file as well with some different issues that they raised and i am just wondering the communication with both of those entities supervisor kim. Im sorry. We didnt make it through all of the amendments. I thought the question was about that so lets go through the amendments. There is one final amendment which is page nine and this is actually in response to sf made. This is actually a very good suggestion and that we allow for a future trailing legislation that allows the city to do a nexus study and create a scheme necessary to what the Housing Developers do and they can provide on site pdr or they have the option to work with the Planning Department and the community on either an in lieu fee and fee out of building on site pdr or provide off site replacement. We currently allow developers to do that with Affordable Housing and it makes sense that we allow flexibility for developers to pick from a menu how to replace pdr. Kate from and sf made says it worked in other cities and cities are looking at purchasing entire sites for production distribution and repair on the in lieu basis or appropriate off site replacement. This is because what we have been finding or what sf made is find wg some of the on site replacement theyre too expensive on the market or irregularly shaped or not correctly sized and this allows flexibility what pdr is instituted in the future will have some flexibility and of course input from the community. Thank you. All right. So thats the summary of the amendments so back to supervisor mar. Yeah, i was going to say i think the answers addressed some of the concerned raised by spur as well and i am appreciative of the amendments that youre propleasing as well supervisor kim. Thank you. Supervisor cohen. Thank you. A couple of things here. I guess i will go amendment by amendment and i will wait. [inaudible] sure. I will open this up to Public Comment first and then well have more questions and things to discuss so if any member of the public wishes to speak on item 4 please come forward. Hello supervisors. Thank you supervisor kim. Im sharon stoier, an artist in the mission in a shrinking building providing artist space to 60 artists and then 40 and now 20 artists. We lost hundreds of studios and lost hundreds of artists in the city who have just left and not come back. Any legislation such as this or any proposal such as supervisor kims that will stop the bleed and start to move in the direction of not preserving but insuring that San Francisco invests in the future of our creative city and our community. Our community is so so unique and so diverse and so creative and thats why the tech wants to come here but theyre in the process of actually transforming the city into a mono culture of young white males replacing all of the rest of us, and its really important for any investment that the city can make in the future of our community, our community spaces, working class, businesses. The blocks where my studio is on folsom street have auto body shops and repairs as well as artists and were watching all of that shrink and turn into juice shops and servicing people who have no interest in rooting themselves in our community. Its so important everything that supervisor kim has been doing in terms of connecting with the artists in the city and trying to see how we can not just stop the bleed, but actually reverse this over gentrification to a mono culture. Thank you. Thank you very much. Any other members of the public wish to comment on item 4 please come on up. Good morning. Thank you so much for taking this issue up. My name is jonathan and a working artist in the city since 1994. This ordinance proposed is important for preserving this space for light industry, blue collar jobs and artists and Community Uses. Obviously theres a history of this. Industrial production zones were introduced in the 80s and 90s for the similar work and recognizing the importance to have a place to repair the car and blue collar jobs and a diverse population and of course to the artists and nonprofit uses. I think its a reasonable request to preserve space for these organizations that cant compete with the rates that office and hightech is offering. Obviously the Northern California grant Makers Association survey is alarming. Thats 66 of the nonprofit and arts organizations are at risk of losing their space in five years. That really needs to be taken under advisement. Can you repeat the number. Its the nonprofits and arts and other social services that were surveyed and 6 are at risk of losing their. 66 are at risk of losing their space. This is vital to and serve the creativity and diversity it serves. Taking these space to convert to high end housing is shortsighted and pushes out Crucial Services that promote a Healthy Society and this ordinance is reasonable in having replacement. Should an Industrial Property is proposed for mixed use. If the builder does that it requires space on the ground floor used for the traditional uses. Thank you for the consideration. I appreciate the time. Thank you very much. Next speaker please. Good afternoon. Thank you for seeing us again here in the rules committee. I am representing the artists again. Fortunately we have artists today to represent themselves, so i am happy to see that. Essentially i have been in the city and a working artist my entire adult life and what i can tell you is that the situation is changed so radically that theres very few musicians. Theres very few Music Studios left, about 500 left during the last. Com crash or whatever you want to call it and basically the tenor of the city has changed and i think that by not protecting the arts in the city and not protecting the cultural traditions that we have weve become a less friendly city, and i think that theres more need for expression than ever, so i hope that we will be able to preserve the art space and this is the beginning of the process it seems. Its a small beginning but its a beginning and i was around during the beginning of the 80s, 90s with all of the things were taking place and thats what developed soma. Thats what developed mission. Thats why everyone keep in and wanted it and we clean it up for you guys to take over and a matter of the next group saying okay we want yours. I am just waiting for them. I own my space of the i can stay. I dont have a problem. I am speak for example other people but all of the people making all of this money as coders and coding themselves out of jobs. Theyre coding theyre building the robots that are taking their jobs away so they wont be around long anyway. Anyway thank you. Thank you. Next speaker please. Good morning. I am from sf made. First i want to thank supervisor kim and your office for really trying to be more inclusive in the last week and inviting us to participate in the dialogue and thank all of you for including sf made by name and making sure that manufacturers and our interest and data are part of this. I think a good amount of progress on the particulars of this proposal has been made as we received amendments from the body and had further discussion among a relatively small group of stakeholders, sort of behind the scenes. My main issue remains i think what we have here today should be immediately introduced with whatever final refinements are made as interim controls right now. I dont think that pushing this forward, waiting until november, spending a lot of money on all sides trying to convince the general public who may or may not have any understanding of the needs of manufacturers orastists or Institutional Uses is inprudent and there groups of individuals and east neighborhood and others would like to have more time in the process over time. We are in full support of introducing some version of what we have today with whatever further amendments will come from this body and others as interim controls now. We remain not in support of setting a precedent of governing how we use our precious space by Voter Initiative so that is my main comment for today. Thank you. Thank you. Next speaker please. Board of supervisors my name is laura davis and i am one of the 60 that was noted that lost their studio space. I had a space for years in south of market and most of the artists probably half of them had to leave the city or just couldnt find another place. I happen to be one of the lucky ones that found another space in the mission which is also under threat in terms of loss of pdr spaces and i only have until this time of next year in terms of guaranteed a studio and then after that i really dont know where im going to be going so it really is important that we look at this issue today and if possible do Something Like the last speaker was saying, not wait for the voters to decide because this is a complicated issue. A lot of the artists being an artist myself its even hard for me to talk about this to other artists. You know they dont understand. They want to go and do their work. You know we are part of the blue class working people in San Francisco who are being pushed out, and you know its important to keep us, so i see this as really the key thing as investment. Its investment for our future. Its investment for 20 years down the line. Who will we have in the city . Will we still have these businesses or will they be gone . Will they go to oakland or wherever . But if we want to keep the businesses in the city we need to do something about it right now. Thank you so much. Thank you. I have a question for you. Maam, can you come up. I have a question. Its a real simple one. I am glad youre here and raising your voice and the the alarm on something important. Did you reach out to the District Supervisor for help on this item . Yes. Jane kim, a couple of years ago because my studio was in the south of mart and it was 43 artists that lost and as of right now the building i believe is still vacant. The owner of the building kicked us out last fall and it was a pdr, and again the thing is a lot of the businesses in the San Francisco dont even understand what pdr is. I agree. He didnt understand. He thought he could kick us out and find someone else. Find someone else. Exactly and we lost the space and now its empty now. Thank you. I appreciate your testimony. Any other members of the public to speak on item 4 come on up. Seeing none. Public comment is now closed. [gavel] supervisor mar. I want oned to thank supervisor kim for addressing this issue and important issues that impact as we stated today artists and organizations and at previous hearings from metato south of mart market and the crisis many are in. I agree with kate and acting now is critical but i believe placing issues like this on the ballot are important so communities can raise their voice. I believe despite the artists displacement and the study shows that 60 are at risk and Small Businesses as mentioned there has been a bleeding serious bleeding of the small building sector in the city. I think since the tech boom began the data for 2011 and like 4500 businesses were pushed out and by 2013 it was even higher so i think the loss of the soul of the city, the unfortunate rise of the mono culture mentioned and as rebecca and other writers have mentioned critical measure this helps and otherric that help and the hotel measure that will create stabilization for artists and others but combined we can do more to stop the bleeding and create the culture and vibrancy of our artists and neighborhoods but this is a good way to start and i hope were looking at it legislatively as well but thanks to supervisor kim and the coalition that are supportive of this. Thank you. I will also put a plug if youre looking for space i am recruiting in district 4. I can now count five artists in the district and before it was one and great improvement and i want to encourage to you look into our district. Supervisor kim had two amendments she didnt mention so lets do that first. Thanks chair tang. There were two other amendments and one is a technical amendment. Take out the pdr1 replacement because its already required so on page 6 on line six we delete pdr because that is a redundant line and second on page eight were exempting projects that have been approved by the Planning Commission by june 14, 2016 which is the date we introduced this ordinance as long as the pending appeals are upheld. Okay. Thank you. Supervisor cohen. Thank you. I think you kind of spoke to the concerns you and i had conversations about i and think we heard in Public Comment last week. I want to make sure i understand this and the Second Amendment exempts projects approved by the Planning Commission as long as the pending appeals are upheld so does that satisfy we heard from a business that came in here and access and satisfy some of the concerns . I dont remember the project. I dont believe thats the access project but theres a project that received approval but may have pending appeals so were stating that as long as the appeals are upheld their project is exempt from the ordinance were proposing. Okay. So then it sounds like what youre describing allows the bistro on bryant goes forward. As long as the pending appeals are upheld. Right. I understand that. All right. I dont believe the access project has received approval from the Planning Commission. I believe theyre earlier in the planning process. Legislative aid april is nodding her head and i am curious what youre nodding your head to. They have not yet received approval. I believe the project is going before the commission in august. I thought it was this week on the 26th. Okay. I heard it was august. August . Okay. Fair enough. Okay. So definitely want to acknowledge the fact that the legislation came a long ways and thank you for ln listening to the feedback you heard from the committee. I want to recognize the folks like kate and some of the other Community Folks that were not part of the process but jumped up and worked with supervisor kim as well as other supervisors offices to really make this a reality. I want to talk about the replacement requirements for sally cpg requirements. My main concern its not supported by any analysis so this is something that i raised last week supervisor kim, and it still remains unclear to me how the. 4 number was arrived and largely my question doesnt seem to be supportive from any analysis and i am trying to get better clarity how we got to. 4 . So there was a general agreement that projects that have already initiated their ee should get some type of grand fathering but because there are several projects on the list in the pipeline theres a concern that if we did a complete exemption of all of the projects we would lose way too much pdr and there are concerns from the Community Members this is too big of a ask. In proposition c and possessed unanimously by the board and via to the voters we did limited grandfatherrings and projects in the pipeline do less than projects that didnt submit theirs yet but we asked for some and the 40 is the new goal of the large projects that we have been asking developers to do 40 affordable and middle Income Housing so we want to be consistent with that 40 number and 40 replacement requirement for larger projects in the pipeline because we felt those projects could sustain that type of replacement. We do however exempt projects that currently have less than 1500 square feet of pdr or arts or Community Use. This is a painful exemption. Many steaks didnt want to a who the stakeholders . We are working with advocates that many of you have seen at Public Comment. [inaudible] in the mission as well so what were suggesting here but what i have decided i do think its reasonable to do a small site exemption as discussed at rules Committee Last week and so what i am proposing an exemption for projects of less than 15,000 square feet pdr and community and arts and consistent with the prop. You mentioned there is an agreement and i am curious who its with . What do you mean an agreement. You said agreement and universally accepted and talked about stakeholders. Which agreement . I dont know. Its your words and not mine. Just a clarification. You said agreement between people. Im sorry. If you are referring to the amendment i said said earlier and different folks we have been talking about with each amendment. So the amendment i am talking about would require replacement for sally c3g. The 40 replacement requirement yes, thats what i am talking about. So this is with stakeholders that approached from the south of market and in the mission. Mission. So i dont know to list each individual name and not each with an organization. If its just organization or i would list them and you know the organizations involved but were working with a lot of individuals in the neighborhoods and many are artists and not part of necessarily an institution. I checked in with my artists and the bay view and feel the same pressure and there still seems a lot of misinformation out there. They consider themselves part of the stakeholders so im going to move on i wanted to respond and respect the work in the district and we know supervisor cohen youre doing a lot to preserve pdr in district 10 so i know at the rules Committee Last week we worked to exclude neighborhood said in your district because we know youre doing work in this arena. Thank you. I appreciate that. Good. Grandfathering exceptions. So for the reasons we have all right stated here today and previous meetings i think it makes sense to provide flexibility for projects that have already filed for their planning documents. I think were in document with that. The change is not insignificant and i want to acknowledge that and potentially significant cost implications for projects we should be applying to it prospectively. I department to talk about the Affordable Housing cu replacement requirement. I dont believe we should be putting profits or barriers for Affordable Housing and particularly in the mission and talking about 100 Affordable Housing. I just dont agree with that. By requiring Affordable Housing projects to replace the uses i think jeopardizing the much discussed and recognizable need for Affordable Housing units. Supervisor tang i think talked a little bit about small project exemptions. I am in support of that and i am happy to see that. I think it makes sense to include the small project exemption and i know supervisor kim you considered that and made good on that. I wanted to recognize the leadership there. Its not just for projects in the pipeline but future projects we dont yet know about so weve already taken Public Comment madam chair. I dont know if this is the appropriate time for me to continue. I do have more remarks about just the overall process. These are all issues coming to us that we can solve legislatively through interim controls or an ordinance earlier in the agenda. We were talking about another item for a hearing and supervisor mar echoed this sentiment and incumbent upon legislators to go through the legislative processes. I have highlighted in the last few hearings we havent been able that i have highlighted the importance of this. It took nearly a decade of Community Meetings in order to establish the eastern neighborhood and there is an established sits Advisory Committee that oversees the plan they think deserves some respect. I again want to echo my concerns in terms of the very Little Community process that went through with the measure. I think its unacceptable but i want to recognize in the last week weve had a series of very thoughtful conversations. I wish we front loaded it opposed to back loading it. It was heard at the eastern neighborhood cac and in fact we received a letter from them asking us to take a step back and not move forward with this measure. In the last week have you met with any. Cac members or authors of the letter supervisor kim or to your aids . I have not consulted with the author of the letter but consulted with some cac cac members, chris and fernando. Awesome. Okay. So they are a few people that sit on the larger body and dont necessarily speak for the entire body considering that the period wrote a letter requesting that we slow this down and handle it a little bit more friendlier way. Theyre interpreting this kind of hostile move, and while we took steps remove the areas in district ten which were impacted i dont think this negets the need for process. No conversation was had prior to this measure being introduced. I understand that theres a relationship between you and the supervisor for Mission District and i think hes given you the authority to do a lot of the negotiation on his behalf but in the future i prefer to be just a simple check in about legislation that affects just to clarify supervisor david campos has been actively involved in the negotiations and his office so he didnt give us the power to make changes in it is neighborhood and his office has been engaged in office meeting. Thank you for the clarification on his involvement in this discussion. Thats good to know and will be noted the regulations in the neighborhood are incredibly complicated and heard this reflected in Public Comment about artists want to be artists and create their art. They probably dont want to be part time planners or encumbered with the planning process and i think thats just the planning process is not something that should be changed this quickly without robust analysis and coordinated Community Involvement and communication, so my overall colleagues my concerns remain that this is a complicated planning issue better left to be dealt with legislation, not a ballot initiative. Supervisor mar you mentioned this related to the last item. I thought that was better dealt with dealing with the last item legislatively in the same way i believe we should be doing with this item. Supervisor kim i would like to continue to urge you to Work Together with myself particularly as we begin to deal with many of the legitimate issues. I would love to deal with them legislatively opposed to the ballot. I think thats it madam chair. Thank you supervisor cohen. I too want to thank supervisor kim for adopting many amendments that we suggested at rules committee but it still doesnt take away from i think my main concern about doing this on the ballot. One thing i do want to clarify and sort out here is regarding 100 Affordable Housing so i know there was a proposal to exempt 100 Affordable Housing projects from the cu process but im very concerned about the pdr replacement requirement. Also fully aware that we dont want to pit pdr Institutional Community arts activities with housing, so with that said i know that you have been in conversation with emily as well and i hope youre hope to entertaining a full exemption for 100 affordable projects just overall from both the cu requirement as well as the replacement requirement . So to be clear several different stakeholders were working with felt very strongly even 100 Affordable Housing should fully replace pdr as we require Market Rate Developers that we dont want to pit them against each other because we want both and with that being said i feel that very few 100 Affordable Housing developments are proposed on pdr sites and i am willing to support that today. I appreciate that. I know we have sophie here from [inaudible] and if you didnt do that and the impact of the projects in the pipeline now. Thank you very much supervisor. Sophie hayward from the Mayors Office of housing and through the chair to supervisor kim thank you for accepting that amendment. Thats hugely beneficial for us. As previously drafted before amendments the proposed initiative could have impacts on projects such as the soon to come 1294 shot well site and added a cu. For that project were watching the timeline very carefully because we think its a good position if titled in time to get cap and trade funds next year and would love to see thats still viable [inaudible] site. Excuse me . How many units are proposed for the site on shotwell . I dont have that information with me. I can get that information to you. Sorry. There is a second site i have been concerned about and 490 south van ness and the city required and the current zoning is [inaudible] and pdr use on the site and if i am understanding it correctly without the amendments the initiative would have triggered a cu and the replacement requirement at rate of. 75 square feet for use of pdr on the site and of course concerned about the this site is also by the way a great candidate for the 100 density bonus so i am concerned to see the addition of a cu on top of that process and the pdr replacement requirement could drive up costs but also cost us units on the ground floor. That said i also want to acknowledge and state that the majority of our ground floor uses in the existing and proposed projects already naturally provide uses that fit within the planning codes definition of Institutional Community use so those are child care centers, philanthropic administrative services, those types of things so were always trying to incorporate appropriate uses that serve the community and residents in that way. In any case thank you very much for accepting the proposed amendments. We appreciate it. Thank you for shedding light on some of the impacts this would have had otherwise and i feel that we build so few of these projects 100 citywide it deserve that separate category in terms of an exemption so thank you supervisor kim. And if i could make one comment to ms. Hayward we appreciate on the ground uses to consider if there are pdr uses previously on the site and take that into account with the project. Absolutely thank you. Just to continue i would say in terms of the grand fathering provision and the 40 replacement requirement unfortunately i will be consistent with the way i voted last time with rules committee and reject that portion of the grandfathering portion and as supervisor cohen stated we havent seen the analysis of that and i looked for analysis as to what are the types of pdr Arts Community activities are at risk now with projects in the pipeline. I havent seen that information yet and for example loss of pdr space at the armory is different than lost of use for an art studio; right . So wanting to see that type of analysis as to what kinds of spaces were really talk in terms of the loss and today i am prepared to take the majority of the amendments that supervisor kim proposed. I think we have to go amendment by amendment as we have done and overall again just to really thank you for the amendments supervisor kim but i just reiterate what supervisor cohen stated earlier and i wish more folks in pdr world Institutional Community use or so forth have been brought into this conversation earlier, so with that said why dont we move ahead here. What i have first the amendment just in the finding section and correction of a typo to say in recent years this diversity has become thrented and not threatened and get a motion. So moved. Do that without objection . Okay. [gavel] next amendment and adding the word mission and although the pressures citywide are felt south of market and mission. So moved. Second. Thank you. Take that without objection. [gavel] the next amendment starts on page five starting line 22 to page 6 through line four. Basically what this is doing is just lining up the cu requirement and the pdr Institutional Community and arts use replacement requirement so they all apply to the same areas specified in this ordinance or this ballot measure so if we can get a motion to accept that. Moved. Moved by supervisor cohen. Seconded by supervisor mar. Take without objection. [gavel] the next amendment on page 6 and starting on line six has to do with removal of pdr from the requirement about replacement one for one and this is just because its a redundant requirement so if we request get a motion for that . So moved. Thank you supervisor cohen. Take without objection. Page 6 this is a lot of page 6 and essentially the amendment for replacement on site versus in lieu fee that is dealt through future ordinance and after a nexus study stated by supervisor kim so that is something i would be okay with as well. Thank you supervisor cohen and we will take without objection. [gavel] grandfathering provision. We will probably need a roll call vote on this but spanning the bottom of page 6 to page seven. I agree with grand fathering in projects submitted environmental evaluation applications to the Planning Department by june 14, 2016 so perhaps we could take that portion first. Could you clarify that again . Agreement on allowing projects to have submitted environmental evaluation applications by june 14, 2016 to be exempted from the requirements. So all projects or just the small site exemption . For me it was all projects based on my comments from last rules Committee Meeting. Okay. While i would not support that i would ask the committee to consider just doing the small site exemption, the 15,000 square feet of pdr or community or arts activities or under 25 units but if the Committee Moves forward with the full grand fathering i will make a amendment at the bull board and require the larger projects at 40 . Okay. We have various opportunities to do that so perhaps do a roll call on that because my preference is separate out the grandfathering provision and small sites from that provision. Okay. To repeat and exemption for sites submitted application by the date stated is there a motion. I will make the motion. Roll call. Supervisor mar. No. Supervisor cohen. Yes. Supervisor tang. Aye. We have three two ayes and one no and supervisor mar in dissent. Okay. That amendment passes. [gavel] i know its not exactly lets see lets take the small site one later. I am wondering through the deputy City Attorney to do the 40 one, that amendment separately or was the last action. I am the deputy City Attorney. I believe because youre grandfathering all projects that submitted the ee application by that date you dont need to vote on the 40 requirement. Okay great. Thank you for the clarification. Or the small site either. Or the small site either. You exempted all. Okay. Deputy City Attorney. The small site the way i understood it and Residential Projects 25 units or less or the 15,000 square feet or less. In my mind there is a grandfathering provision for environmental application provision by the date and secondly there san exemption that would not cover the exemptions inlet pipeline but smaller projects . No. Thats the way i would like it to be but there could be objections to that. Supervisor kim. There were objections to that and my compromise was to do it for the grandfathering but actually you know this was a major oversight in my office and not reaching out to sf made earlier and i want to acknowledge the criticism and include them earlier but it was important to them we dont exempt small sites. From the ones in the pipeline. The future. But the compromise i am offering here and proposing at the full board is grand fathering the small sites in the pipeline but not prospectively. That is not the intention of the measure as written. Supervisor cohen. Thank you madam chair. Is it possible that we can get clarification from sf made on this item since the executive director is here. Sure, i would like to hear that as well. Thank you. Our position was not on the grandfathering. We at this point feel that there is a process in place called the Planning Commission and other community processes to opine on existing projects. Were more open to looking at small site exemption. There is an exemption already for 5,000 square feet of pdr which is pretty significant in the smaller scale neighborhoods of the mission so i think that would be accurate to say were more on the fence as to whether there is a need to pump it up to 10,000 in the mission in particular so i think we can live with the legislation as written at the 5,000 limit for pdr but not in support of putting further limits on projects that already have submitted their ee so half true and half different. My apologies for misunderstanding the position on the pipeline but to clarify you would prefer to keep it 5,000 and not and not the larger amount. Its a compromise and we want flexibility and being a nonprofit developer of an industrial space how expensive it is to build that space so the more you have limits for smaller projects the harder it is to get the cost next economics and rebuild housing at the same time and for us were willing to look at the exemption but there were a lot of Community Members at this meeting and were trying to fairly compromise with some of the other stakeholders in the room particularly from the mission and the Arts Community but again were not in support of placing new restrictions on projects that already have submitted ees, some of which are weeks away from getting the Planning Commission hearing. We feel the right place to opine on those is the Planning Commission. Thank you. Does that help to clarify . Thank you for the clarification. So i dont know if that changes supervisor cohen your perspective on the grandfathering provision. Well, currently the amendment that has been put in by this committee which i dont support but i understand where its coming from and full grandfathering of projects that submitted it. My proposal is that we grandfather in small projects, 15,000 or under or proposing under 25 units and all other projects do 40 replacement and not 100 and given that the Committee Moved Forward with the grand fathering with the projects and ask the committee not to do the small site exemption but hoping with the amendments to allow for off site replacement and in lieu fee that were able to address some of the in between projects to give them a little more flexibility if that makes sense. Okay. That makes sense of to me. I would be okay with that so moving on to the next amendments then. Page seven line nine i think that there was just a clarification that replacement requirements reduced by. 25 and project by the city and sold or leased 50 below market space for commercial space and subject to a deed restriction. Did we answer the question whether this is allowed, this amendment, this vision provision given rent control laws. There is a provision under rent control prohibition and have an agreement and all parties agreed to meeting of the minds and Development Agreement with the city of San Francisco we can impose through the agreement commercial rent control. Got it. Thank you. That is something new i learned. Okay. And to further explain this piece although it was discussed last week as well we wanted for developers who were willing to commit to inclusionary on site and not require them to build as much pdr and acknowledge they would take a hit for Fair Market Rent and nonprofits and manufacturing to rent the sites. Okay. So on the amendment page seven this is adding the words subject to a deed restriction. If we can get a motion . [inaudible] moved by supervisor cohen and seconded by supervisor mar. Take without objection. That is adopted. [gavel]. Page eight and this is where we get into all of the exemptions and supervisor kim would like to exempt parcel zone p and no replacement requirement at any time. Parcels marked p are public. Okay. Thank you. Can we get a motion . So moved. Take without objection. That amendment is adopted. [gavel] there was an exemption about okay. So dont need to do small sites anymore. On the additional smeet sheet of paper and delete the other uses so it would be like for like replacement and not interchangeable and if we can get a motion. So moved. Second. Take without objection. That is deleted. Lets see on 100 Affordable Housing i think my desire was to add just a full exemption for any cu or replacement requirement for any 100 affordable projects so if we can get a motion on accept that. So moved. Okay. Take without objection. That is adopted. [gavel] madam chair, im sorry i might have missed this. Did we do the motion for projects approved by june 14, 2014 as long as upheld by later appeal on page eight. How is that 11 through 13. I guess my question is how is it different from the grandfathering provision that we adopted about june 14 and environmental evaluation. Actually thats true. Youre right. Thank you. Okay thank you. Okay. So we dealt with the 100 . On page nine lines 12 the amendment is to allow the board of supervisors to enact an ordinance adopting in lieu fee and or off site replacement option via i believe ordinance. Is that correct . Yes. Via ordinance. Okay. If we can take that amendment or motion by supervisor cohen. Take without objection. [gavel] great. So i believe that those were all of the amendments unless i missed anything . No. No. Okay. So again thank you supervisor kim for allowing that. I think one other outstanding issue was about the Historic Buildings so i dont know if you could speak to that and why theres a disagreement on that. At this time we were not able to get a good enough survey of all of the potential historic in landmark buildings that would be impacted by this exemption so we dont feel comfortable moving forward with that amendment. Now we understand the overall the general rationale basis for that concern in protecting and improving historical buildings. There are additional costs to that but without a good survey and study of what the universe of the projects are we dont feel comfortable moving forward with that amendment today. Is that something you are interested looking into if there is future analysis done . Yes, we are open to look at that if there is further information. We just didnt have the time to gather that by todays rules Committee Meeting and i wanted to acknowledge i know we have been talking about when is the appropriate time to use the ballot versus passing legislation via the board, and i just want to say i completely agree that is an important discussion to have here at rules committee and the full board just as ordinances that were discussed previously to this item, the neighborhood foot Patrol Initiative and i think there are ones we can pass here instead of the ballot box and via this measure and just to explain why we wanted to move forward with the ballot we felt it would ensure a floor by which the city was submitted to protecting pdr into the future and that this use is important enough to the city and to our body that were willing to proffer this and put it forward via the ballot. We want to be careful and implement the amendments thoughtfully discussed lasted weekend. We appreciate many suggestions made. We know not everything was clfsed at least in the amendments i submitted but we wanted to engage the community and members of the board on that conversation. I do support if there is an interim control measure moving forward. I know that supervisor cohen was interested in that. I did think there is no reason to wait until november and pass an interim control soon today, but this is a permanent measure and i think that was truly our intention and this would be a permanent ordinance, not just an interim control, but i do we will continue this conversation both inside our board processes and outside as we determine what the best vehicle for preserving and protecting the pdr uses are in the city but i do ask members of the board to really consider the universe, not just this measure but others as well and taken via ordinance. Point taken supervisor kim, so at this point we have adopted again the majority of those amendments so we will need to continue this to another rules Committee Meeting which i believe is scheduled for monday so can we get a motion to continue to the monday special rules Committee Meeting. As a committee report. Well, at this point monday meeting okay. I will make that motion. Okay. So moved. Take without objection. This item is continued. [gavel] thank you very much. And are there any other items before us today. There are no other items madam chair. Thank you. This meeting is adjourned. [gavel] good afternoon commissioners and directors welcome to the joint meeting between the sfmta eight board of directors and the Planning Commission. Item 2, roll call for the Planning Commission mission or antonini speed present johns and, present. Then what, present. Wu, present. Richards, present. Fong, here. Hillis is expected to be absent for the sfmta brinkman present borden, present. Grant hi nikki is absent then shoots to trim present trend ramos, present. Wu rocky, present. Borden present. Mr. Chairman mr. Pres. You have a quorum item 3 announcement of coalitions against sound producing devices during the meeting. [reading code]. Please be advise cell phones cause microphone interference. Theres likely request they are in the off position. Item 4, communications. Commissioners, directors i know of none at this time. Moving onto your regular special calendar. Item 5, presentation and discussion regarding connect sf Transportation Vision plan. Good morning. I can see all of you, but [laughing] ed reiskin down here. Members of the board, members of the commission, mr. Chairman and mr. Pres. , im really grateful for the opportunity to come together today and in this unique increase my, joint format to talk about an effort that we been undertaking that i think is critical importance as we are facing the demands that the city is. A wild back, director rahaim and director of county Transportation Authority as wells karen rich and gillette from the Mayors Office got together and decided we needed to collaborate on him much longerterm approach to Transportation Planning in the city. I think theres been a lot of great Transportation Planning that has happened in the past few years and decades, whether from the land use planning, the area plans, various kinds of Transportation Plans and project plans that we done. But, i think we all agreed particularly given the dynamic change thats happening in our city that we needed to take a more conference of citywide and longterm approach to planning transportation in the future and doing it with calling it a Transportation Plan but its really a joint land use and Transportation Plan to transfer check plan is very much informed by land use. So, it is been so far a great collaboration should i think its one thats absolutely necessary for us to do as a city. Its probably something we shouldve been doing all along but certainly now given what we are facing as a city, its just all the more important. So it has been a great partnership. I want to thank the Planning Commission for making staff available to work with us. Weve been working between our agency, planning, the mta and Mayors Office. I think this is really important work and will really benefit from whatever feedback and guidance you have to provide us today. Thanks commissioner could i also can see all of you. Im down here on the other side john rahaim with the Planning Department should i want thank you for coming together to get this is been a goal of commissioner johns and for a long time to happy to finally make this happen. As director reiskin said, just a joint effort between the three agencies in the Mayors Office and it is i think the most conference of approach to Transportation Planning that the city is taken in a long time. Something i think that he, we agreed really needs to happen. Especially in light of the citys growth and the reduction in car ownership and all the factors that are going into putting pressure on our transportation system. Inevitably, when your conversations like this they are complex and it is very challenging and appropriately so to talk about transportation in and of itself without talking about land use patterns, without talking about issues of equality and how this how the public gets around the city. So, these discussions will in fact become complicated. They will inevitably involve discussions of the citys growth, where the city is going, how the city is growing as well has access to the Transportation Systems are and where that system evolves and grows. Including issues of Pedestrian Safety housing affordability, Traffic Congestion thats all going to be encompassed in this subway and we have to address accurate as youll hear in the presentations from the staff, we arethis is a Transportation Plan editor needs to be but happily informed by land use patterns and other cities growth in the next coming years. So, what you will hear is a presentation from Reese Espinosa and members of the staff or the mta about the components of this plan. As well as the land use productions we are prepared to kind of informed decisions about this plant can we look forward very much to hearing your comments and as youll hear, we are ready and will be preparing in the fall for a more robust Public Outreach on this effort. So, with that i think will get into staff presentations. Thank you. Good morning commissioners could bury a espinosa with the San Francisco Planning Department i start with a presentation today i want to just ground us in what we heard from the previous two presentations both the mta board and the Planning Commission this week and last week. We talk to you a bit about the state of the mta system in your presentation by tom acquired auditory white from the mta. We talked a bit about iran use projections by the patterns of land use and policies that shape what our city looks like today. So, for todays presentation staff will describe to you what this longrange effort is and we all cant connect sf because its about connecting all of those thoughts regarding land use, transportation, economic development, demographics, all of those factors that will go into shaping a very complex city and challenges to come. So i will walk you through the presentation good i will walk you through the what the components are of this effort and it will be over a couple of years because there are so many complex factors. We are coming to you early because we want to get it right. We will make sure were grounded in the framework we get to hear from you and your expectations in this effort. And also that we understand how to shape our conversations with the public and the community as this goes forward. So i really welcome the opportunity to hear your feedback on that get us out with a presentation and then i would like to introduce my colleague ran sub away from the mta to be part of the presentation with me. I also want to about other stop in the room. I appreciate into Michael Schwartz from the mta for being here good as well as other staff who been integral to going this overall effort together. So thank you very much. So, why are we here today . Connect sf as i mentioned is about shaping our citys transportation future. Our Transportation Network is such a finding element of our city and how we get around. It creates a cities livability, our economic vibrancy, it has impacts on Environmental Quality and urban character. I connect sf effort is citywide. It looks to both consolidate and coordinate transportation related Planning Efforts to improve mobility for all folks in San Francisco and as director reiskin mentioned, it is a multi Agency Effort for both the planning and implementation agencies will be involved in connect sf. There are some major components that i want to talk about. First, we have a city gen. Plan and there is a key component in there which is a transportation element did it links all of the citys guiding plans and policies regarding transportation. The transportation element is also the to in a moment has updated in 20 years so we need to catch up our thinking in what policies help guide and shape our modification of how we implement our transportation system. The general plan as you know, is linked to the work of the city Planning Department and in addition, we buy San Francisco Transportation Plan that will be updated get the San Francisco Transportation Plan typically undertaken by the San Francisco Transportation Authority, and it gives shape to our priority projects, our plans, and are funding and Revenue Streams that will help shape the investment in infrastructure over the next 2530 years. Its an important document. Those are guided by our policies. We need to do them but more important way, we need to link them together to make sure they are working in tandem and not at cross purposes. We also will be undertaking a series of mortal studies did with this means looking in detail at the transit network, at our street network, understanding all of the different components and how they will affect our system overall. In so doing, really the leadership of the different agencies in the city came together because they knew they needed to undertake these plans and projects but more importantly, what was missing and absent with this overall vision this overarching vision, for land use and transportation to really help shape and guide the overarching policies for these important implementing documents. The vision is really a process. It will be shaped by stakeholder and public input and it will help guide our thinking 50 years out into the future. You may be asking, why such a significant time horizon . 50 years is a long time. Who knows who can predict the future but we do know what some of the key uncertainties are get we do know some of those drivers and change will be and we also know what Disruptive Forces are happening now do we need to Pay Attention to whether its changing demographics, or different regional funding opportunities could all those factors we need to have in one place understand and talk about the implications of each. So, those are the main components. I will walk through what each one is. We could not do this without Stakeholder Involvement. So this includes not only our partner agencies, but other agencies within the city. Clinically, regional partners such as are other operating agencies bart as an example being other key partners that will help shape policy decisions for land use and transportation in the region. We also critically feel Stakeholder Involvement means communicating with the public and hearing what peoples needs concerns, thoughts are. As we go through for the as john mentioned, were going to be undertaking a series of outreach opportunities through the fall to keep this off and understand the needs of the public. So, with the vision i will walk you through what that entails. The opportunity for the vision isnt funding pensions it allows us to test our thinking with big ideas and really see what can we innovate, what can we shape. How do we need to think outside the box and maybe think about this cchanges though becoming and a future. We will identify the goals objectives and policy grammar as i mentioned give that overarching framework to help guide our policy documents to come. We know that there are some uncertainty in the future. Especially for such a longterm horizon, but will allow us to test our thinking in different ways by using scenario planning to help shape different pathways if we went one direction and invested in the Network Without look like . If we took a totally different approach what would that mean for our city . So it will allow us to have these conversations. We are not necessarily unique in this idea. New york deftly undertook a visioning process called one new york but i think as a city, so important to the economy and to housing considerations in this region, we are going to be a leader in our thought processes and thinking to help other cities in the region tackle these Big Questions as well. So, will introduce the transportation dialogue engage the community, discuss ideas, and really identified a number of different scenarios plus preferred future we want to see. We really have this opportunity to shape the future we want and so this is an important dialogue will be undertaking it this year with the Public Outreach kit will be doing that in the fall and into 2017. We are going to start out with some guiding goals that we want to see if that resonates with the public. Certainly, we envision a future that thinks about equity and im really helps to understand the implications of equity for our city, making sure users of our system both equitable and Affordable Access to good services, activities and destinations. We know that safety and moving is of quite critical importance of our community to be above attractive and safe travel options that support health, livable neighborhoods and address the needs of all users. Environmental sustainability is a critical component of this because we want to support a healthy environment with clear quality that is responsive to Climate Change and different dynamics that provide Sustainable Choices for our future. And Economic Vitality is a key foundational goal of this effort. The people and businesses easily access to destinations for jobs and commerce, including both established and growing neighborhoods in San Francisco and the region. So, this is our starting point. We like to take these calls out to the public and see what resonates and if the public thinks these are the core that we should focus on. Other major components as i mentioned, mortal studies. We are doing some pulmonary work now for a subway vision. So i might think we heard comments from the Planning Commission previously about with the future of our local Rapid Transit network and how can we both plan and build and think about those things in tandem. So were doing a lot of Technical Work to study these efforts now and will be bringing Something Back in the fall. We also will be looking at both opportunities for muni transit and Regional Trends and how they link together how they serve the city them how they serve the immunity patterns into and out of San Francisco. We will be looking at the role of our freeways and arterials. So, how do those major linkages for Goods Movement and Service Delivery shape a role for that travel and transportation here in the city. We will be building on existing and ongoing multimodal lands. So, not just about transit. We are a city that thinks about and welcomes into theinvestments and pedestrian and Bicycle Safety. Better infrastructure for both those modes which as weve seen, with a reduction in car ownership for newer generation, theres an opportunity here to invest in those modes as well. We will also be undertaking a San Francisco Transportation Plan 2050 which will be a critical component for input into the next round of the regions plan bay area. So, this will be the most informed by the mortal studies and vision to ensure Regional Transit and that investment is linked to that will be looking at investment scenarios so opportunities for funding, revenue sources, Revenue Streams and where we prioritize those investments. It would be important to mention our transportation element update, which as part of the general plan, is an important codification of her citys transportation goals and policies. The last transportation element update really gave shape to the Transportation Network that you see today with the four corridor plan. We also know that our application of these is what you see as directors and Board Members when projects come to you get so this is a way to link all those things together at the local and neighborhood scale. So, with that i like to turn it over to my colleague graham, to ground us in the current commit conditions and what we need to think about today. Thank you teresa. Good morning commissioners and Board Members. Grandfrom sfmta. Building a little bit on what some of the Planning Commission heard from tom and victoria last week in terms of where are we at today the transportation system. From a regional perspective, we have seen dramatic growth in ridership on caltrain and bart. Over the last five years, unique metro has also seen increased demand for its services. And under each of these systems are at times when we are forced to leave passengers behind at the platform and the demand simply exceeds the services we can provide today. Also, i want to note the muni rail system while wholly contained with the geography of the city and county of San Francisco, the rail system and bus system are absolutely key pieces in the result has petition network and fully serve that function and continue to integrate regional and local services to make it seems transit experience for travelers. Specifically, looking at bart, their extensive stream ridership pushing not only beyond their own adopted standards in terms of Customer Experience and passenger comfort onboard, but also National Subway standards. In key to San Francisco is to recognize two out of every three bart trips in their entire system either start or end on market street. That is artistry is really the backbone of the bart system and providing key regional connections. When we shift beyond just transit and think about the multimodal nature of travel with to and from San Francisco, the sf mta is stated objective of 50 or more of all trips by nonprivate auto mode. Weve done statistical we surveys with the past few years and in fact we are just above that target at around 52 of trips occurring. In nonprivate auto modes and thats both regional entering, regional exiting within the city of San Francisco. We have seen a sort of study percentage of their and that is because this is all trips throughout the day. Its a big number. Just over the more million troops protected odyssey that continues to grow as our employment and residential population continue to increase. If we take a little bit deeper dive and look specifically at commute trips we are noticing the net increase, the new trips that we are capturing from a transportation system, are actually occurring primarily by transit and active mode. That can be existing commuters, making a decision to use an alternative mode or a camino commuter same, to leave my car at home or on something up and own a car. This is really just evidence that we are continuing to improve and increase the available transportation choices for people and they are taking that. So some evidence of these during commute or not we are seeing shifts in people making choices in slightly different ways that may have in the past. Again important to note this a small number of trips relative to the daily total. Thats probably why well continue to see small increase of 50 but we want to see continued progress. Then, when we think not just about people but how goods are moving around our city, this religion a shift in how that occurs. In the past we relied on deliveries for difficult to access or unavailable goods locally and now delivery is used for daily necessities and groceries and common occurrences. We would use it neighborhood commercial street to access him with all our physical goods. Now, theres a most like mobile storefronts with ondemand delivery and at the drop of a dime you can get whatever you need without leaving your residence. This is all to translate to changes in how those goods are moving on our circa street, are we using the steps of the postal using arterial and local roads appropriately and how is that evolution going to occur at the demand for these ondemand goods and Services Continue to increase. In terms of that movement of people and goods, this is the inextricably linked nature of transportation and manuscript that movement of goods and services to amines which is the landuse side of the equation. There is a cyclical nature to these entities that San Francisco is actually wellpositioned both by the nature of its built environment and longstanding policy to be a leader in statedstaples targeting our sustainable communal strategy and sp375 in reading both the state and the region in those areas and at last weeks Planning Commission a prime example this brought up by commissioners johnson and the richards on the central somite intent of transportation when use decisions are being made in comp concert and forming one and thats exactly the type of decisionmaking and relationship thinking we want to continue to encourage. As we look to the future, we need to acknowledge there is a level of imbalance in terms of jobs and housing, location geography and density and how we access that. But that we are continue to pressure to grow in the two channel that growth into positive weight and improve upon their past decisions and how we move into and through San Francisco. So, we want to think not just about the plan we put in place but external forces that may influence or affect the plan that weve set up your we traditionally think uses acronyms as steep social technological economic environmental and political. Recognizing that there are external factors beyond our control and we should try to plan and account for these uncertainties in some manner. Lastly, there is a key component of that is to knowledge that transportation and land use is not purely a capital build, build, build perspective but theres a system management and a policy end of the spectrum we need to consider in terms of making sure we utilize in all our resources and assets efficiently and to the greatest extent possible as a means to achieve our stated goals and outcomes we are looking for. So, as we try to think, again, about some of the uncertainty out. The plans we put in place theres a number of questions that we as staff brainstormed and there really centered around what is the citywhat is San Francisco aspire to be on the landuse will build a transportation perspective . Will will will like to see the city in the future in terms of the level of access, mobility and inclusivity . Theres a number of fronts by which we can start to tease that thinking forward and try to bring out the direction and vision that we at San Francisco hold for ourselves, but staff developing these questions are great. We really need buyin from the public of the need to engage some of our citizens and ask them to be visionary and to think not just beyond themselves or their own street but for the city as a whole because we are here together and together we can set that direction for San Francisco. So, teresa is to come back and how we are really looking to engage the public, get them to weigh in and make sure the staff are clear on how we can channel their vision and their direction for San Francisco. You heard about this effort and i was reading an article in the economist that talked about young people and how people are changing their travel behavior overall and its a Something Like 30 of all young people are now taking ridesharing options for their travel behavior. This effort is so critically important because it we were business would be thinking what is our research and Development Arm and what are we going to do to really think about how we put it towards the future and are be ready . So, with that, we need to hear from our public to understand what are the changing roles and values . What we need to be ready for . So think about their values and priorities are for the future and what the city should be like for future generations. I think San Francisco is it unique city with a special character and so, do people want to continue to preserve that . Do they want to modernize some things . Do they want to have all of the above . That the composition both easy and hard work and undertake with the public over the next several months. So with the vision, its really about understanding eating a comprehensive and deep look at Community Matters experiences. Moving through the city and their needs and priorities for future transportation system. It will be a hard conversation because the natural reaction of folks is to say, well what about today . You heard about some from graham crowded conditions on trains and buses and we are trying to advance our work there and implement are great quality service. People care about whats happening today on their street in the community but we also want to help shift the dialogue to the future and its hard to do. But we want to make sure we are starting point is grounding in peoples current realities and existing conditions. So that we can create an overarching 50 year vision for the future that speaks to both the current needs and get a head of the factors and trends you are graham speak about that are to come. With that, i would like to offer up a few closing words from a citywide planning director gil kelly good to talk a little bit about the process Going Forward and also offer this opportunity to hear from you about your thinking and feedback to us on this effort. What we need to think about. How to continue to engage the public in this very important and critical dialogue towards the future. Thank you marissa and good morning directors and commission should they keep extending your time today to talk about this important piece of work coming for. Ill be very brief good i just want to embellish the comments a little bit from both graham and teresa on the public process and talk a little bit about the quality of Public Engagement on this one. Although we define this as transportation and a conversation should in the end the focus on transportation, which i think many of us would find more broadly slightly more broadly as access and mobility, access meaning not only how do i get to transit which is one problem to solve in transportation, but also, how do i bring the things i need my daily and weekly life closer to me so i dont need to take a trip. So those are both parts of the equation. But i think even more broadly than that, for the Planning Department and in particular this is opportunity for major scale Public Engagement across the city and i think its one to be nearly impossible to have this conversation without bringing up a lot of other issues and one way to channel that energy is the way in which ram described. There are external factors we can build into the transportation thinking. The other but frankly and parallel, to both provoke and harvest some of the information to see feed into other efforts the Planning Commission tragically knows about why longrange planning work program. Which i think will be an official. We wont be channeling people stop transportation can talk about that. They will need to have a weight to engage people and bigger questions and have a place for that in the conversation good so, i want to just let you know about that and with thinking through how that would work. One weight we see some particular to conduct the early and middle phases of both the access and mobility conversation as was the larger one is to really make use of scenario planning which we have not done a lot of sons. I think it be very very helpful in this process to really not looking just big middle and large middle and small sizes of things or transportation speeds, or that kind of thing, but also to think about testing very different kinds of values in that conversation. So, youll hear more about that as we get into the process but i think were looking at ways to engage people. Peoples imaginations. I feel like ive actually really getting something out of it because its going to be a challenge to get people from the current here and no complaints about current transit and so forth to and more robust conversation about the future that we can bend back cast from and start prioritizing the immediate investments and improvements on. I just want to add that context to the public discussion part of it. To the conversation. Thanks thank you. That includes staff presentation thank you, yes that includes and were ready for any questions or comments you may have that you will open up to Public Comment then commissioners can comment after. So opening up to Public Comment. This opportunity from emerson the public to address the Commission Regarding this matter. If you do it he could fill out a speakerphone. Thank you. I appreciate you posting us having this wonderful conversation it did before you start, if i could, just that the public know that the chairman and the president is that a twominute time limit for Public Comment all up as much content as possible into mins but i think the wonderful conversation into his good i was writing and saw the twolane street with a mighty victory over there in downtown. I would like to propose a list of 18 multilink oneway streets for event you understand these commissions are working on this. The interesting thing were looking at the correlation between low income density residence being hit by motor vehicles, president criminal behavior, the public arena open space, fastmoving oneway traffic and significantly underperforming retail business. I think that in terms of environmental and progressive weve left some options off the table. I think overall its our plan is to create a Carbon Neutral society, that we have to do it amongst this conversation at the confluence of planning and engineering. Right now, i believe that 40 of the environmental commission, 40 of our carbon carbon images come from the automobile really looking at ways to limit that and technology and individuals are embracing that. I believe that we have more parts of cars that public open green space i think thats another interesting thing to look at. I know, right now somewhere between 5060 of the hispanic 18yearold graduate from high school and you might think, this is for the educational but this is things that can be solved by solving by planning and engine should look at are then used that she looks 80 of our new unit moving into 20 of our central city core. Looking at the outside the box idea with more resources, more financial more natural political resources that many other places that we want to engage in conversation that other cities across the world are going to look atcan i use the over it please you want to look at and apply to their musicality. This slide i pulled from the 50 year plan. Look at this guide and go he studied color theory and look at the colors we have our red is very concentrated on the central city corridor. A little bit to the southwest, look to the southeast. I think that in terms of [inaudible] was slow the downtown thank you, sir. That is your time. Idiot like to leave your drawing their. That would be great. Im sorry president fong i miss the gentlemans name would you repeat your name for the commission i dont attribute my name by name is vino does a. They can for your public service. Thank you. Next speaker. Good afternoon. My name is george wedding can im the president of the coalition for San Francisco neighborhoods. Very briefly, i would love a definition of what the both groups consider equity. That would be very important. Neighborhoods as definitions tend to change. The other thing, the Economic Vitality mentioned. This is going to be a real game changer as you change roads, transportation, cars, you are also changing the streets, access to businesses. Already, we are being approached consistently by this week the geary corridor. I think what you are going to find is youre going to have intensive outreach. The groups i represent are very upset already about what is happening locally. They are not looking forward. Theyre looking at whats happening to the neighborhoods and they dont like it. They dont like what happened on Mission Street. They dont like what is going on right now. So, anything you are going to do to push forward you are going to have to do a really good job to get people to accept what is happening. Because all i hear is negativity. So, with that, the last thing is money. Obviously, after taxes constantly you want money. For these plans more and more money for transportation. Asking people for more and more money. Property taxes. Tax sales, you name it. The question is, how much are you reallyare these people getting for what they are paying . The current person should be getting about 10,000 dollars in services a year for their taxes. Theyre not getting it. Thank you. Your time is up. Next speaker, please. If anyone else wishes to address the policy body fill out a speaker card for us. Thank you. , puberty. 27 years ago South Beach Marina apartments began that neighborhood is like the first neighborhood of these last the first neighborhood in new modern buildings. What were going eastern neighborhood of a general much of the eastern neighborhood plan that was settled eight years ago, how much is that still relevant . How much hit the mark . How much of what happened because of the last couple of years of economic boom has kind of reduced that to dust . Its hard to go into the future. Its hard to have communities here. Look at this meeting and i came here just because of this meeting and how many people do we have in the city you want to Community Engagement is tough. You have Community Engagement, the caravelle right now the communities is upset about that. Im upset about our new articulated buses, 65, 67, 72. When you take a bus use it near the driver and listened to that rattle draft. I can hear the rattle in the back of the bus did so were having problems that we speak here. It does can be a work in progress. What we want is to a healthy community. We want less stress. What we are setting up is a whole new plan and i am saying that south beach is never really become a community. It misses the aspect of community. What a community is a group of people that come together. You could you dont walk your dog and your push a baby carriage, its hard to meet people. Its hard to be on the streets. There is a missing of community. We have to go outside the box to get that. 2 min. Is slap thank you. Any additional Public Comment . Seeing none, Public Comment is closed. What kind of pingpong back and forth if you dont mind. Commissioner antonini i try to keep this brief. These are some of the things i said last week but i think its worth bringing it up again. The first thing is i think we need some joint notification of the two commissions on major issues of [inaudible] mta or from planning particularly with reference to planning where we have larger commercial developments, which will generate traffic and transit as opposed to housing which is generally much lower relatively speaking. So, whatever we can do about it a memo at least ahead of time and its a major change, maybe it should be somehow calendared. If the commissioners [inaudible] the public is always coming to us complaining about mtas and im sure the reverse happens with you guys regarding planning issues. So thats the person get the second thing i want to bring up a couple of issues on bikes. I dont need an answer today, but we see a lot of bicycles without how much. I thought it was a law. I never see any enforcement of that but this adds to the severity of accidents when someone is hit even at a slow speed if they dont have a helmet. I think that needs to be enforced. The other thing that seems counterintuitive is we spent a lot of money to create separate bike lanes and separate bike streets. The classic example is upper market will be gradedapparel quiet street perfect for bicycles and they still ride up and down market upper market, which is very dangerous because you have cars moving a relatively high speeds with curbs and are not expected to see a bicycle. We need some enforcement not only for drivers but also for bikers were so no notification that no rights beyond this point. Please use corbett and that would be what id like to see. Then, thereve been a lot of complaints about the not too much can happen on masonic yet but its one of the few arteries that exist for motorists to go west in the middle of the city. I am not sure why some of the bikes baker wasnt what that is impossible because it parallels masonic for much of the way. Its a lot wider. The other thing about last week i think is important is the turn indicators at downtown where you have a separate turn signal for walkers. A separate turn signals for right turns. It works very well. I mean, people can get across safely the motorist can make the right turns without having to sit there and try to squeeze between pedestrians and this only leads to accidents because people try to get in as quickly as they can. The others, left turns, coming off of fillmore and turning onto lombard looking into the sun is very dangerous. There should be no pedestrians at the time youre making a left turn. Because you cant see them. I am glad to hear youre doing some longterm planning but jiggly with reference to working with other agencies and subways in particular because we live on a narrow peninsula. People from the east bay north bay and peninsula by necessity, have to travel through San Francisco whether they want to are not. That topic is not going to go away. Its always going to be there. Until they bite crossing or some alternate weeks, could we have to really buildout we had to really look at transportation in its own right of way because all were going to do is add more buses just clog up the streets even get subways are the most realistic way to go and maybe we can somehow work with our leaders in washington work rate a better dialogue with the congress to get more funding for where its critically needed in this city. So, that is a view of the things i was thinking about. I am gladthe other thing is, i know theres a lot of talk about you have an increase of people who are not using individual cars and that is probably to get i dont have any doubt that is the case, but you want to make sure youre not selfselecting out people who have cars, which often time his families with children who will avoid living in San Francisco because it so difficult to have a car, drive, park. I mean we have to address the entire population not just this patient of everyone not having a car and i think we have to be equal in all ways and the more nice transportation we get in its own right away the more people are going to use it and not use cars. Effective sit on a bus and take two hours to get somewhere in the city is not going to happen very often. I think thats the key to the whole thing. The other thing is you spoke briefly about the online challenge thats created by all these people buying everything online. Means more deliveries and would be the case before where they make one delivery to a store and then the pedestrian the buyer would have to make it to the store. Now they dont make it out of their desk. Its not really good for them in terms of exercise, but also its not very good for us. It looks like the transit of the future but perhaps we can find a way to reverse it or encourage the use of our stores both local and formula retail by actually purchasing from them rather than supporting something that requires more trucks. The other thing thats important when you talk about pdr which is a big issue with us, i think we have to look to relocate pdr, or support pdr. Because that just adds more problems when they have to take their product and drive it through narrow streets in neighborhoods that are typically small streets often with a lot of residential. I mean, we should encourage them to move closer to 101 so their access is easier rather than trying to squeeze them into a place where they really dont fit. We dont use rail that much anymore and i think thats important as we look at projects in the future. Talking about saving pdr good lets save it but put it where it makes sense. So, thank you very much. Thank you. Mr. Jim and im sorry. Just to but at my naivete im not so familiar with the term pdr eduction distribution repair. A classic car autobody shop very good. Thats the term we dont really talk too much about over here. So is it manufacturing uses which we used to call it very good. Thank you for the clarification and personnel insure the mta board with say how happy i am this mentor i think its important i think a lot of good from it. But that chairman fong has suggested and i agree the backandforth. The other thing someone made a comment about new york has done this exercise and i think mip level to find out what went well and what went poorly and an executive summary. I dont [inaudible] but that might be helpful as we begin the plan the Public Outreach. Additionally like that available i forgot who said that reference new york but i think thats best practices are a good fit. Thank you. I will start. Thanks. Im happy we are here obviously coming from planning and being on mta we talk about these things all the time. I had a question by the transportation elements and am happy to hear were finally looking at that i get i know the Housing Element but he has to be updated every 40 good weather any guidelines oh pound of frequent viewers. Update participation element and happily maybe thought about when we look at the housing almondim not suggesting bundled in the transportation element looking at those sidebyside . Because the howling Housing Element is where people are the living . Real quickly kill kelly again. There is no prescription by state law for the tobacco to update the transportation almond. Thats a local option at the housing almond is the only one that has that requirements. But, i think if i alluded to before, this is an opportunity to look at other overarching policies like housing policy that goes along with the transportation discussion. I would encourage we look as we look at Housing Elements we look at the transportation in the future because especially the southwest southeast part of the city grow and the southern waterfront, its going to be become more and more important those two documents online. Absolute. As i mentioned us in planning. I think well get at some of that they are trying to get to by using scenarios to test different about that in one case we want to behave the smallest ecological footprint that ashley might have more to do with access. Getting things to work people are as much as it has do with mobility building morteza get one of those things for example, might be prioritizing and building of a couple schools is ou San Francisco. So kind the School District into this conversation is important i think were going to try to reach as many those kind of relevant babies is as we can in this conversation ax you make me think about talk about job and commercial vitality but the issue of Public Open Space and public facilities and how we make sure those factor into this larger than crosby people do need to be able to get to but i transit. The school by transit. Especially now more and more people are sending their kids to schools closer to them. So making sure that is part of the dialogue. The other point about your bringing things to people could i know this is harder to engage but if you can engage with the ridesharing services. They have incredible Data Available to them and they dont want to share their individual user data we should not ask that they know patterns either everything from whether to time of day to where the most frequent pickup and dropoff locations are for various services. I think we can engage those because for example in stockcard delivers for pyrite and safely at all the different grocery stores. Having them part of the dialogue so we can figure out maybe they already are serving areas that are underserved and how do we better facility that. I feel like the issue often about the people doing transit and theres lots of research waited to convenience. People do the most convenient option. It is convenient to god they will drive it is convenient to walk thats convenient to make transplant services of the next of convenience and People Choose them because of that. So we can figure out the patterns. To a certain extent i think we spent we try to force people to have certain patterns or behavior could we they actually know what peoples patterns and behaviors are maybe that something without checked mail sub Demographic Data around their user base. That would be useful. Another thing i was thinking about in terms of equity the environmental sustainability oh idea of immunity we think about, receipts we like a bus stop apart. Were looking at that with our moving forward plan but think about generally, from every place in the city is there a standard for how many blocks you from transit it is out to the community. It could be other forms of getting around but looking at how we can if that is of value or something we want as part of this larger process. Then, finally, obviously the issue of self driving cars thats another thing that intersects into this conversation and engaging people that are related to that because thats the next phase of the Rideshare Services we did not anticipate. So thinking about that could honestly rideshare taxis also should be part of that conversation as well. In that particular point about how can we maximize them for the first and last mile connection with the more traffic on the road better self driving. Exactly. Yes thank you. And commissioner moore i hope this is the first of many meetings. Because i think the nexus between transportation and land use is so obvious it took about 5 min. But this group to talk and there were questions which showed the incredible necessity for us to work more closely together. As far as the vision plan, i think you are laying out some incredibly ambitious and wonderful framework. The question i really have and its a question of technique, are you encouraging us to not use the present as a starting point but look far into the future that is very difficult to do. Particularly, when this commission every thursday since in the crossfire of what is not working that is indeed a significant gap between proper planning and the overlay of effective Transportation Plan. Thats not a question of saying that youre ineffective. However, the city Transportation Planning at least for the us for San Francisco the growth and changes by far outpaced anything we can do so we are dealing with a downside of what is not working. Why we embrace for example the growth and the positive growth, in eastern neighbors and the changes every week and there is not one thursday where it doesnt happen. All the neighborhoods the Neighborhood Network etc. Standing in front of us and saying, on this you start taking transportation before seriously and changes and then use implementation, we are not planning. So youre having the citizenry which is basically seriously disappointed and affected by whats not working and you have great transportation ideas and implementation. However, the two are not about now youre asking us, and back to my initial question, how are you how can we do it not to think about the present where we want to go and how we get there and do vision planning, which does not take the present into consideration . Well i do not mean to to say exclude the present condition and in fact, i think both the mta mta have a lot of informational current gaps. We should take that as a starting point. But when i describe the use of scenario planning for example the first scenario is a baseline scenario not that we wont do anything else but will do kind of what we been doing. Baby at a light rail line every decade or will add some buses at the rate we been doing it. What does that look like in comparison to narrowing those gaps and doing with the new growth we anticipate . Thats the starting point for this scenario discussion and then i think we look at what does it take to do some more aggressive policies that will narrow the gap . And what do those investment implications it were those landuse change implications. I do not mean to say were going to exclude the president i think that is actually the beginning of the conversation but until you reach out and divided a desired future and then start back drafting by decade getting closer to the present, you dont have way of necessarily changing the current trajectory we are on. I like the linear and interlinked thinking of what your link of your being hijacked, though by the new economy which has become more obviously in the last year and a half. How do you deal with these unforeseen attacks on the more predictable way youre protecting Transportation Planning . One way is to not try to be a slave 2. 4 cast either in population were jobs reading types of jobs. Instead to use ranges. For example, josh w who is your today and Scott Edmonson on our staff have done a lot of detailed work on landuse projections. Taking into account the growth in recent uptick in the kind of employment youre talking about. Would like to project that trans outburst of the more traditional trend. I think theres a way to play with some of these variables to serve triangulate on with the future actions might be. Thats one example. We dont anticipate this current spike to continue on its current trajectory forever in a 50 year period, but it is certainly get to come out of this with a vision that allows for adjustments to conditions as they change. Just one more thought. As you were speaking, to keep an active neighborhood involvement i think will be critical to really be on target of where deficiencies had problems are. Last week we had ms. Hester here in front of us who kept reminding us that all of the Transportation Planning that she has seen mostly occurs as if that San Francisco is a nontopography city, and she urges us as Planning Commissioners to bring that into the discussion. Because it has a huge affect on how the systems work, where the issues of accessibility and neck with your. I just want to throw that in. She is not here but i know she would probably want that to be heard by you as well. If i could add one point. The point about axis been so important and being the counterpart to mobility, is there been studies not in San Francisco but other parts of the country, where people have examined sort of the dense mixeduse transit orientated type of development get one with a rail transit, one without in the greater dc area. The one without the rail for nearly the same number of trip reductions as the one with a real experienced and thats because roughly 5six people strips are on foot by bicycle when you have all the services nearby. So, i do want to keep expanding the conversation went transit lines and wiggled and how do we think about neighborhoods, to third but first i want to say great presentation. Im so pleased to be here because i think the released intersection is strong. Mr. Kelly, to your point thats what resonates with me as well. I know my neighborhood, i can get everything i need from a 95 of my trips on foot in the make such a big difference. I get to work on transit or on bike. For all my other trips i walk or link them with transit or bike. I think that really makes a huge difference as we get people used to that idea coupled to your point, with a Delivery Services that we now live, so those things i cant want to i could choose to have them delivered if i dont have access to a vehicle. I just want to say, thank you, to both the planning staff and the mta staff because whenever i look at these mode sharing statistics i realize that our work has really helped us dodgy about. When i look at these new commuters that weve added since 2006, and the small relatively small percentage of them that drive alone and i dont know what page thats him. Page 19. The relatively small percentage that drive alone, we could barely accommodate that percentage on our city streets] so the fact we have so many people who chosen to take transit to bike and to walk has completely saved our bacon in the city otherwise would be it complete and total gridlock on our streets other than the authority had more writers on muni and rush out. Those people that walk and bike, thank you very much people who walk and bike because thats helping a lot. Also just want to say i traveled a lot and ive not been in a city where transit is not overcrowded at rush hour. So, if we think thats a reasonable expectation breast to have as a city that would be the one city in the world that manages it. We have to remember how important it is to get a lot of options, not just the commute trips but for the errand trips. I dont will he have a lot of other input because when i look back at the projects we have done i know we get a lot of concern and we get a lot of push back as were introducing projects, but i think the proof is in what happens a year down the line or two years im on. I use my own commute as a really good example. I take a flying five to work. The change in that bus line and the four years that ive been using it is dramatic. I get to work so much more quickly, so much more reliably and i know the growth on outline has increased and we have kept up with it. We can do it for that line. So we can do it for all ones could we can do it for speedier. Would doing it permission and yes, there is a lot of concern when we make big changes such as the one we may commission it but again the group is going to be in what happens to those 65,000 riders on that mission line every day. I think what were going to see them overseeing and continuing to see, is that they like the changes and they appreciate being able to get to work get to ahrens, take that corridor much more quickly much more reliably. So, i think that the Community Involvement is huge. But it can be so hard to capture the voices of the community who are pleased with the changes went to the bank and look forward to the changes as opposed to only hearing the people who dont want the changes and are upset with it. Thats what i think we have to look to our exceedingly smart and well trained staff who know what they are doing. Identical to mr. Kellys point, the Planning Department doing all of this trip modeling and all of this planning modeling and knowing whether the man is going to come, ive seen similar maps from the mta. We go with the job growth is good we know with the population growth is. We note that link them up and weve got to get rid of the weak points both in our bus system a pedestrian system and bike system for the people can feel comfortable in all those modes. Thank you. I think is a good start i think were making really Good Progress could i also just want to clarify that commissioner antonini for helmet use a believe its only under 16. When you see somebody like me riding without a helmet bashing not breaking the law. It just my personal choice to ride without a helmet. But you are right. Somebody under 60 should be wearing a helmet. Thank you. Commissioner johnson so, im super excited to be heard. Everyone on the Planning Commission has seen an advocate for this hearing and super excited when it got put on the calendar and im also super excited i know we have 12 today but i hope [inaudible] 14 and i think all of you would be willing again to be together [inaudible]. Opportunity come back and see the outcomes of some of the process. So, just a couple thoughts. When i first asked this hearing a long time ago, i had a very different vision of what it was first i had no business it was sort of like i came from working in a development where things were more whole list. You just talk about transit and equity and open space and all these things. It which is the same conversation. When we had staff coming to cac and later chair of ocii commission was from all the agencies. Was really this demarcation that i got appointed to planning and it was like i was real confused. I felt like there were certain things we cannot talk about baker jack about transit. Thats mta. You tackle can talk about streets. Thats dpw. We dont know it was very challenging. Yet we got yelled out about everything. I was like what have i got myself into. So, when i first asked for this hearing was more about very prosaic things like i would still love to see i know that we are moving certain lines good theres moving four. The transit Improvement Project at one, five, 10 your map of where the lines are going to be added work capacity will be improved. Because when we get people asking about eastern neighborhoods were other neighborhoods, its good to be able to say well, with moving this project today because we have to at some point make some progress and concrete has to go on the run at some point but in five years, here is the plan for the transit access will look like to be great to have that as part of our packets per decisions. Rather than relying on what individual commissioners can glean from the news or research on their own. As commissioners is our job to know that sort of information. So when i first started off asking for this hearing i just had a list of questions like that. Sort of request that i think would be helpful but as time has gone on and i continued to ask the listing hearing my thinking had you called on what it was i thought we could accomplish. Im really happy to hear this actually process now so not one hearing to talk to ourselves were a bunch of time and then nothing else. But i would love to see is i actually do think its possible for us to think about the longterm. I think its possible to do it in awake to our daily work. For example, we recently passed pdm. When i would love to see is what is the research telling us about what are the measures and metrics in pdm are the most effective theres a list of like 50 Different Things you get developers to sort of comply with pdm. Which commendations of them are the most impactful spirit because as a Planning Commission, those measures are the ones that we agitate for and those conditions of approval for projects and we set a standard for ourselves could. Im so sorry. Those become conditions of approval for projects and then we said set a standard for so in every project that becomes the thing we start asking for. A great example that today even bepdm is commissioner Richards Will agitate for additional car share spaces. Thats great. I agree with that. I like it but what does the Research Tell Us about additional car share spaces actually helping to shift mode share its a nice thing to happen would great to note it actually helps the situation so we can know if thats the thing we should be pushing for with every project. So, thats an example of how my thinking had shifted on what i can accomplish by agitating for 14 people reading each others air for two hours and sitting up. That sort of one thing. I think in addition to sort of things like that which i hope will come as a part of asking the public what are their thoughts, i think that we can organize our future conversations by first planning for the growth we already know is happening. I think, you know, talk about pdm and how can we organize our thinking about what is the most effective parts about pdm is great also talking about other things related to pdm. For example, parking i know mta has a whole sort of staff that thinks about parking. Well, what can we inform the Planning Department and Planning Commission about that because the project large and small, we are eliminating parking in our way of getting to that will share shift but i want to know, is that effective or are we just making people lives harder setting ourselves up to get jo that more . I would like to know that. I think planning is on the part of the conversation we have about planning for the growth withers change the retirement can see the future but its fuzzy and we dont know exactly whats going to happen. Director borden made a great point bringing up collaborating with the new economy and convenient services. I think thats great. I think we should do it. I think we should be talking about what parts of our physical infrastructure can change to make that it seems like a permanent lifestyle shift work within our city. I also think we need to be careful about being too specific about those types of services because many of the ones the name that came up those companies are profitable and may not be around when the funding environment changes. Theyre not making any money right now. There just supported by their current funding environment. We need to make sure that we are both taking what is permanent about the change in separating it from what is transitional transitory. I think that is something we can continue to have a conversation about personally, maybe people dont agree, think having of us appears during those thoughts in person boxes get there rather than going between commissions. Thats just what i believe. Then, i think theres a whole other conversation and part of that last thing i would say is, in keeping with the growth we can see, there is collaboration with the data we can get right from other services or other data teams wrestle think theres some blue sky thinking were going to have to do to then promote the change we want. For example, going back to parking. I do believei want the data on iti do believe reducing parking i think weve seen research on it does shift mode share because reducing parking makes it harder to other car people find other ways to get around. That also brings up all other thing about what do we do once that becomes a permanent change, and its not transitory anymore, that sort of a shift people made they figured out how to get around, what do we do with the parking that we have right now . With the adaptive reuse for Street Parking for underground parking, for on ground parking that weve approved in various buildings what we need to do with planning code and building go to make it easier to adaptive reuse . Parking is just one example that. I think if i had to those were three conversations i think it happened simultaneously and i hope that what will happen is the public can be guided to have a conversation with that structure so its not just what do you think thats really challenging for people. It is what do you think in these three different buckets would you like to know now that you can be confident and comfortable that change is coming within your neighborhood . What you think about how are we planning around the things you already know about the buildings you see coming up how are we planning for how youre going to get around that change happens in the nearterm and longterm, the sky, would you think we should be doing . I think will get much more helpful feedback in that way. I have a lot more i didnt get back to my original concepts of us sitting around today i have a lot more specific asks. The one, five, 10 year plan for mta Growth Strategy given lines and whatnot. I think might be helpful for me to give that to staff and see start getting those maps and checklists and Different Things im asking for i know you guys can put together. And sort of leave it with the big thinking like that. I am hoping ill asked the question of the staff. So, what is the plan for the public process . When are you going to actually start scheduling charrettes and things like that spirit went you think it would be helpful to have commissioners and directors come back with more feedback . Sure. Thank you. I really appreciate the comments about structuring our thinking and hoping to find the right balance between what peoples existing realities are and how we start to engage in conversation about the longterm. So, for the public process we hope to go out for our reach in Early September the september timeframe. So, we would have a series of open house sessions with activities that are providing some level of background for the public. Again, whats happening on the ground today. What do people think about the future. What do they think about the overall goals and framework that we talked about for this overall effort . Then, start to do so they work to understand what are peoples existing experiences, understand the demographics we are reaching were not reaching. Someone made a comment earlier about equity and what is that definition of equity really understanding that is going to be very important for helping a shape our thinking as well. We would do a couple of rounds of outreach. The first is much more to understand as the public want to participate knowing that this is our overarching structure for the process. Its going to be over a couple years. I walked through each of the different plans and projects to example being the transportation element and mobile studies, and those will also have associated outreach but for the overall vision that is one we are we really need to engage as you said the public, in blue sky thinking and so we would have a series of stakeholder meetings to inform how we structure the conversation and go out to the public, collective Community Groups and partnerships and so we would have several rounds to do that. I would also informed as gil mentioned, i think about how we structure the scenarios. So, what different types of scenarios with informed those conversations as well and to also incorporate people who are maybe not in the details of when you sent transportation but as folks mention, folks representing the new economy, folks representing technology, folks representing community organizations. So we are not just hearing our own selves talk about this because we spent a lot of time in this work and in this world but were actually hearing new voices to the conversation. That we will challenge our thinking in different ways. So i hope that gives some flavoring outline of what we would do. Be dick i just jump in on that. I think the basic structure of the Public Outreach overall correct me if im wrong, but follows more heres what were thinking heres what existing conditions are and what you think and in january, we start more intensively with a scenario planning. So it may be a good thing for us to check in back with maybe individual commissions late this year after we hear the results of the fall sessions and then maybe a joint session in the spring or early summer next year to hear about the results of the scenario planning exercises. Im thinking out loud, but the point is the fall is more about here is where current thinking heres what the Current Conditions are. What do you think . Then we get into more of the nuts and bolts of the visioning in january. Assad asking for the other joint hearings in jan. Thats what you are saying. [laughing] put on the Events Calendar now. Because the calendar is so full anyway. Yes, thank you so much. Well be happy to be here think for agitating for this meeting. I have three awfully quick points. One, has to do with our [inaudible] and i am wondering i know those are great deal of thought and effort put into the rh ran around the smart city challenge. Im wondering if any of those effect on what is applicable here or useful. You dont have to answer that now but it seems like something to think about considering how big and effort went into it and the idea of getting activating different parts of the community and neighborhoods into thinking longterm and into the future but how we can leverage all the Great Technology and minds we have any yet. Thats just a quick thought on Public Outreach. My second point has to do with accessibility. More specifically for people with disabilities in our community. Specifically, looking towards the new technology that we are seeing. Those both in respect to transportation but other things as well. As many of you know, its very challenging legally is very challenging. Sometimes when new technologies and industries emerge to get them to comply with accessibility laws and to make sure they understand that people would disabilities need access as well. We are experiencing is really heavily in most apparently with the pnc in our community we want to encourage innovation and forward thinking about a transportation but we want to make sure the communities that are necessarily going to be very present Community Outreach events that theyre taking care of your when we put in car share spots the crusher companies were contracting have successful vehicles so people with wheelchairs can access those good otherwise, a lot of those people are forced into making position of owning private vehicle and put the stress on our system. I know theres lots of jurisdictional challenges with this. Were seeing that now with [inaudible] som hoping to get it is powerful commissions and agencies and the wonderful city staff we have, we can really focus on getting some equitable legislation with respect to access. So my final point is a shadow to the south beach committed summary said on the Public Record was not a community and thats my committed it such an active community and i love it but its a wonderful place and a good example where transportation was putting totally earlier in a different phase of the community naturally developed into a very full active community would also suggest rotation. Thats my final point and thanks again. Thank you. Commissioner richards thank you. I also was hankering for this joint Commission Hearing and backing up commissioner johnson because one of the things were making decisions on every week really affect everybodys everyday lives. Now and in the future could i mentioned last week context could i took a look at the work context and i put it into i guess what were talking about today in terms of planning could context for decisions have to scenario planning which it looks like the contractor do and have done. I really love to see the next hearing with the scenarios actually are. Im sitting up your thinking, be without the scenario plan if you got 50 years it needs to include deliveries by air but by vehicle. I really want to see with those look like at a high level. Capacity planning which is where we are today and will get from the citizens every week especially in the eastern neighborhoods, i cant get to get the crowded. I get run over by these cars. More cars on the road. Now im in the future and id love to see from a capacity planning point of view in case reports maybe im asking for too much herewe always get this project is served by these temp different lines within a quarter market if we know theres going to be additional lines to contemplate or added that would be helpful for us to also understand because were making decisions with more context around where things are dont get were putting this is can equate a problem or not . The other thing i think were not doing a good job his integration plans and integration planning, to me, is jobs, housing, business population transportation linkage. So, how does this integrate . We talked about the mission into changes in looks great for the riders for some people and cars. I do tweet once where i got stuck in traffic jam on shotwell street because i could not turn and not knowing where i was going and actually went out to look at project site in bernal. When im hearing from people are Business Owners on Mission Street is my business is down. Did you take that into consideration the impact in business would be in terms of the modemodes of getting to my business i can does this in san mateo. He and his wife come up for dinner on Mission Street by the goods and services on mission is to get a went to the dentist last week and he says i thought building there because its such a hassle. Easily other kind of integration testing when he took hold ourselves accountable for. The other one is also business and i know there has been meetings with the Small Business commission. If you have goods and Services Within walking distances, as vice director brinkman been said, you never need to get into a car. However the retail environment is changing specially my neighborhood. It businesses holding right and left are we apprentice really hot. Web services are things i cant get raised will go and buy stuff are my office did not go to office depot south of market rent that it delivered by google or whatever it is. Thats also i think another thing we need to look at. We are probably 50,000 ft. 2 of retail space vacant my neighborhood alone. If unable to fill that up and consent of good variety of businesses and goods and services are would never want to go to office. Its not particularly enjoyable expected i love to by mike l paper in the neighborhood. The other one is Contingency Planning. Im not sure i heard a lot about what were doing around there. I know mr. Kelly said were doing ranging forecast, but id love to understand if we look back and causally get as commissioner moore said complaints about the eastern neighborhood. We see more of a linear growth in eastern neighborhood over 25 years. We got a significant amount of growth in asia could not sure we did a lot of Contingency Planning around what if the worstCase Scenario, base Case Scenario and almost correct but we have disclosed any years. What would we do i sat with the potrero votes in the Mayors Office around having interim shuttles line 11 or Something Like a like but synthetic from potrero down to mission bay i think those are the kinds of things that would engender trust in the public and the people have faith in this process if we knew and were to say, if this certain milestone gets met then this is what were going to do. But, heres what would you do and work in a plow forward as can be advised that i do think is what people want to hear. People want to it we do have some type of planning process that does trip the red light goes on blinking when we see things not going exactly as we thought. The other thing i would like to see our, in terms of interim policies that we have in the and use, there are things we are doing that sometimes i get troubled every week especially on parking. We have lots of large project authorization special user neighborhood resident 300 unit we up to 70 Parking Spaces and i kind of go, heck, were inducing demand and i know families need cars and i know we do it by number of bedrooms but we are is the data to tell us thats actually what we need . Where are we going . As commissioner johnson said to do families take rideshare do they have other modes of transportations. What is the neighborhood i dont understand. I think beating that drum quite a bit. Then this car ownership and car use. I say, give me the data on the census tract with her asking for additional parking we have these what i think are excessive amounts of Parking Spaces did you see the ownership rate is lower than the spaces youre trying to provide for the number of units. But the heck is going on. When you talk to developers they say well people want driving there just storing their cars. Weve have car storage. Persist parking. Only been up to napa for when choosing once the market you get the stories how much of that soap is real and what do we believe . That also would help me make better decisions and loading an unlooked the sleep we get joint policy with that project 7 1 currently on the drawing board where in a major intersection going onto the bay bridge on harrison street 390 3 91st st. They have the loading on the outside of the building where you can have your uber dropoff and your people moving in and out of the building with their couches and furniture and boxes. Right in the lane predisposed to be loading and unloading we have dropoff talk about living an entire apartment. Policy were trying to get to somewhat is but the loading on the inside of the building. These are policy directions i think we want to get to. What is loading on the outside of that building to circulation we dont know but were kind of guessing time to ask that works and can wear using standards like uhaul van back into a onebedroom apartment. Certain people i dimensions. Actually trying to get some rid of putting spaces and have intro voting that i think would help the situation. Im not sure because i dont have data. Its all more gut feeling anecdotal. The other one i think is a lot of physical constraints around actual print circulation at we put the driveway . What does it dowould visit you for the rest of the ecosystem . Some of the things i worry about. I would like to see bands use decisions with transportation policy driving where we want to go. If we would have a target of this amount of cars this amount walked disco land use decisions there to incense and entice people to do that rather than to a finger in one. Weve got a letter from market octavia asking for pocket reductions in the public which were potentially the zoning high. They say they want less cars that. Those are the kind of things that i think we should listen to to see this cac is doing an analysis on should be lowered in our parking required. I think whatever we do with the decisions we make id like to understand the impact of them on where we want to go. Thanks. Commissioner hillis thank you for this incredible opportunity. Really really complex your forward thinking commissioner johnson and i am willing to get together as often as you folks can tolerate us. [laughing]. I know youre all an inspiration at your service and commitment to the city is exceptional. I for one am deeply grateful for all the work that you do all the long hours. When we have our long meetings, you keep me going because i understand youre doing this every week and it certainly something to admire and appreciate. Thank you all for your service. I know that i, for one, would be really excited to meet with you whenever you make the imitation could even if youd like to get together for lunch and debate helmet, commissioner, or anything else, i would please reach out to me and lets go have a beer. But to talk about all the stock. I do speak a bit of acronym so, i understand things like pdm and pdr. I think that we can certainly make our conversations more accessible when we try to spell these words out so that the viewing public can get a good understanding of what we are talking about. I know the Transportation Demand management is what you mean and i think that its reasons like that that we need to having these conversations all the time to inform one another what were doing with pdr. And what have you. Looking forward to learning all that youre dealing with and thinking about particularly being influenced and inspired by sp375 and plan bay area and wonderful efforts to get planning and transportation together i could not be more excited. The thing im most excited to talk about and to share in this train of thought here is the concept of equity. Thinking about how our city stays accessible for everyone who wants to be here. I come up for one, cannot here in the 70s who my father brought us a family of six. Is gone on to have children could ive got Something Like five or six nieces and nephews just on my side. My parents have since retired. Im the lastim the only person in my family that can afford to live here in San Francisco. A lot of it has to do with the fact that waiting i have chose the children because we are confident we would be forced out. So, i would encourage all of our decisions and all of our thinking to be built around how are we going to make it so that our family members, but just whatever business smashing and whatever is happening in the economy can stay here, but own family members want to be a good soul i dont have to own a car is a riesling had to buy a car a couple years ago to take care of my family. And have them here. so we can all be together and have less dependency on a car. I dont think that any must have a vision of what did you say director antonini . We dont have a vision of everyone not having a copy i think were trying to do is make our streets accessible for everyone whether you have a car or bicycle would depend on the bus or what have you. In that way, when we achieve a city thats more equitable and inclusive, we certainly become more sustainable as director richards was talking about hoping to aspire to one thats more sustainable and one of course economically thriving. One of the wonderful things i love to hear i love it when director ryan talks because he reminds me of one of my uncles because we both hail from detroit. Thats a city that has gone the wrong way with respect to the dispensing back now im proud to saybut went the wrong direction and its a very affordable to live in detroit but economy is terrible. I know you folks are walking this balance act and i admire you for it and am grateful the work you do. But the capitalist economy and the free market doesnt thrive on equity doesnt want equity serves the judges and the bottom line is not equity driven. Its about my kids getting the best return on your investment. So, your job, i think i like to help with that job, is to as a Government Agency government body, is to do what we can to actually put that lens of equity onto this free market and make sure our city stays inclusive and the one that we all grew up in and love and cherish and yes, we would love to see lowrise developments and be more paris like if you will but the dirty secret about paris its bring this suburbs the people that can afford downtown where they work have been forced to live and it saturated with traffic on the outside and theres choking their economy and environment is getting worse and worse all the time. There are obviously social ills that come with that that we are seeing play out. So, this is all terrifically huge conversation and we certainly see at least i see, my role as a director on this body, to make sure we are looking at transportation to achieve a balance of equitable city thats also economically thriving and also environmentally sustainable and all the decisions you make help you think about that. The one thing im eager to talk more about if we were to meet again and over within just a beer, i would like to talk about what kind of decisions are we making on a regular basis project by project and are we orientating the project to transit . We orientated to the pedestrian are we making sure that people who really do need a car have access to one because we try. My wife and i tried to give up a copy of we are spending 100 every week renting a car from one of the peer to peer networks. It wasnt working out your we were spending more money than we would take root after just own a car. Weve got a ways to go. Im confident we can do it with enough passion and commitment will have clearly demonstrated in your shirt on copper we can get there so looking forward to all these conversations going for. That. Commissioner wu i just want to add a few thoughts since we want to get out of your time for lunch. They can begin to for everyone for your comments and for bringing us together. I have one specifically on outreach. I think his dedication to equity is really exciting to see it named as a goal and an integral part of our work. I think outreach and equity is quite difficult actually if you ask people what do you think equity, is so vague it so broad its truly hard. For me, it is about what our people daily lives like in San Francisco we talked a bit about that today. For low income people in San Francisco the words they go every day . Two they need to go to take their kids to school . Two they need to get groceries and is the transit project or office or residential project getting bills making their lives easier or harder . I think those are the kinds of questions we can ask people to really unearth what theyre doing lives in San Francisco are. And how to make it easier for them. My second request is more technical one. I have been watching the transit equity baseline from afar. I think theres some really great work thats been done already. The analysis and strong but how do we integrate that analysis and decisionmaking projects, both for both the mta board and for ourselves. Thanks. Thank you for this meeting and, present and this is greg i was told some of the new having drumming and they were excited. Asked how long do we have that as far as i know is the first time its been done for some time. They thought it was a great idea. Just a couple quick things. I think the outreach is one be one of the most important pieces. The joint outreach because i can say to director ramos is going as a parent i found having children is not really an economically rational decision [laughing] at this point. At this point im committed so a lot of decisions for me revolve around expense time and convenience and what can work. One of the things i do know is for working parents and for small Business Owners, because if that to run the shop, it can be hard to get to some meetings remain just a on top of whats going on. One of the things to chairman nolans point comparing what new york is and what we do here in outreach i think would be nice know a little bit about mta has done thats worked with the Planning Commission has done thats what it may be compare notes on that. I know the mta has a survey right now to talk about whats going on and how people want to do their outreach. I think thats a great thing and maybe a little bit more of that. The other thing is, i think as we move forward with this is important to think a little bit about a downturn scenario. Weve had a nice run. Great funding environment. Its not that go on forever. I do know theres going to be next year or next two years that we have some kind of slowdown. Were moderation but either way i feel like its important the that in mind as were throwing out different scenarios. Thank you again inky. Any other comments . Let me wrap up if thats all right. Again, thanks staff in both directors for helping us close this meeting in august the everyone up here. I think is a great opportunity for us to think as futurists and overstaffed thats largely what you do but its a great opportunity here is commissioner moore said i think this is not a hope this is not the first or last of minutes but the first of many in 50 years could to your most comment about downturn, probably big cities like new york, chicago, while they had 100 year advantage of building up transit they probably didnt with their foot off the gas pedal even during economic downturns and kept on which projects going on. Which leads me do some discussion staff hear about longrange planning and while we have all these different agencies and departments and silos which we are good at the ability to think outofthebox and longrange and not get tied down into somebody does i think is important. So, enjoyed all the comments. Obviously theyre all right on. This is a broader first big wide scope meeting but hopefully the next couple meetings we can narrow it down to some tasks in the fall. Again, appreciate everyone for coming and thank you for the public for making comments. Is there anything else on the agenda one i think the Planning Commission is providing once. Right. If theres nothing else the meeting is adjourned. Thank you. [gavel] [adjournment] good morning and welcome to the Board Meeting of the Treasure Island mobility management my name is jane kim and chair of the committee and keith is our clerk id like to recognize mark and Nona Melkonian for broadcasting our meeting today mr. Richie commissioner avalos commissioner london breed absent commissioner campos commissioner cohen commissioner farrell absent commissioner kim commissioner eric mar absent commissioner peskin absent commissioner tang commissioner lee commissioner yee absent we have quorum. Thank you mr. Clerk, call the next item. Chairs report on information item. Thank you this is our first meeting since january and i would like to recognize my Committee Members vice chair commissioner avalos and commissioner campos for serving with me on the timma committee theres been a ton of activity on the island and to see the Infrastructure Projects and Mobility Programs that the staff has led and coordinating it is incredibly exciting to see our Transportation Program take shape a commitment to the residents of the island over 10 years ago were newly beginning to formulate what a new ferry and extended bus route and car share for the completely new neighborhood in San Francisco the timma committee met last week im pleased to the side is responses including the feedback about setting a town hall hours of proclamation and affordability a particular those that live on the island prior to the development and the recommendations have been refined thoughtfully to address the town hall concerns concerns the low income residents and to stand and diversity the Funding Sources beyond the users fees in this phase id like was pleased to write a letter of support for the trlt application for cap trade this will fund the pedestrian and bicycle infrastructure on the island that is exciting and support a new ac transit clean skilled buses to allow the residents to take Public Transit to the east bay it demonstrates a partner with local servicebased businesses in this case the on time and on schedule initiative that began was we moved the residents and our commitment to housing both residents that residents families and vaernlz that are formally homeless and to provide vanderpool services to support our vulnerable residents finally id like to appreciate long time island becky on the Transportation Authority cac many of you you know becky active in the Franklin Delano Roosevelt Democratic Club and ever seen is Pedestrian Safety Advisory Committee an update in march and the Transportation Authority Community Advisory board heard unanimously and endorsed those recommendations in june she serves on the Advisory Board and provides a link between our two citizen advisory groups and recognize bob the director of tihdi thank you to all the folks for your service and with that, mr. Clerk, do we take Public Comment on this item. Yes. At this time Public Comment is open on item number 2. Good morning, commissioners my name is jeff kline and im a 17 year resident of the villages on Treasure Island and want to correct commissioner kim and director chang you keep on calling it a Community Advisory board that is a citizens advisory a project committee and the redevelopment law but you got a special tida a waiver to allow the establishment of the citizens Advisory Board and only 2009 before the 4 residents elected to that board out of 19 people on the board so it is not a Community Advisory board not represent the community and im friends are with becky but shes disabled and 61 of the households on Treasure Island have a vehicle and do drive including myself and i commented at the july 30th with an of 3 residents along with becky and betty makingy why Yerba Buena Island who commented the only residents that commented any of your Meeting Community full board and im here again, i want to ask that when i make comments on island 8 and 10 youll allow me a full 3 minutes to finish my comment i have in writing and glad to provide in advance thank you, mr. Kline well provide the 3 minutes on those two items seeing none, Public Comment is closed. On this item. Can we please call the item. Directors report an information item. Thank you chair Kim Tilly Chang this month our report hospital a has several opportunities as chair mentions the cap trade application was submitted in june and director bob beck and i 2r5689d to sacramento for the Council Staff when we were impressed with the overall application four the hub facilities and the vanderpool services were keeping our fingers crossed there we applied for federal grants following the opening of this federal usda Transportation Management Technology Deployment program last week secretary fox was here for the vehicles symposium and many of the smart cities initiatives are moving forward following the announcement of the grant award going to cleveland and San Francisco is continuing to develop other kinds of projects to put forward including on Treasure Island were tracking regional grant opportunity and many of the parishioners serve on the district and tracking the transportation for the Clean Air Program that is administrative code by the air district and the one Bay Area Program they could yield demonstrates fund to move forward turning to the local issues on any report the plan bay area draft somewhere was realized by the staff and hoping is that i live support of the Treasure Island initiative in the second rating in a row of high tier performances with the high cost profile the draft transportation scenarios will be presented in september continue to work between now and then and come back to you all with the specific requests or recommendations in that regard Ferry Service ill note is taking shape on august 4th this coming august the water Transportation Authority weda will present an update on the services for the transportation board both our agency and theirs have been working hard to seek a green ferry technology for the Island Service this is their hybrid fuel and were also working to jointly get funding for the Island Service this cuomo meeting with tida and the potential start date for Ferry Service with the Capital Plan Fund and subsidies that are required and finally your tolling system a concept of operations which describes the components of the toll system how it represents to the San Francisco open bay bridge toll system with the completion of the funding we sic entity from experts and companies with the Toll Services and were working with researchers at the uc berkley and others jurisdictions gone before us in the area well brick all that back to you and take eric for the Capital Projects for moving forward and in addition to your on time and budget and our Bicycle Safety hes e hes working with the Toll Authority to deliver ill be happy to answer any questions you may have. Thank you director chang any questions for the director. One question ii had as a foul of Public Comment and hoping all the members of the Citizens Advisory Committee that that would be helpful to know who sits on it. My apologies to that committee for given the wrong i should have noted a Citizens Advisory Committee at this time well open up for Public Comment seeing none, Public Comment is closed. Can we please call the next item. Approval the january 26th meeting onramp action item. Thank you. Any comments on this item. At this time we will open up for Public Comment on item number 4. Seeing none, Public Comment is closed. Can we take a roll call vote. Item 4. Commissioner avalos commissioner london breed absent commissioner campos commissioner cohen commissioner farrell absent commissioner kim commissioner eric mar absent commissioner peskin absent commissioner tang commissioner lee commissioner yee minutes are approved. Thank you and mr. Clerk, call actually items 5 and 6 together. Item 5 approve the administrative code and item six the minutes of order and the fiscal and business reimbursement those are action items. Any comments on items 6 and 5 at this time well open up for Public Comment on those two items seeing none, Public Comment is closed. On items 5 and 6. Mr. Clerk same house, same call . Same house, same call . On those two items mr. Clerk, call item 7. Item 7 adapt a fiscal year 20162017 annual before you get program an action item. Thank you. Any comments on the proposed budget and work program surrendering open up for Public Comment seeing none, Public Comment is closed. And we can take that same house, same call . Mr. Clerk, call the next item. Item 8 approval the Treasure Island action item. Thank you is there any comments on this item. Seeing none, open up for Public Comment on this item. And mr. Kline well grant you the 3 minutes for Public Comment. Ive used this before so do you recognize this hi jeff kline a 17 year resident and good morning and thank you for hearing any comment as i mentioned one of the 3 residents that spoke in the july 2015 timma all four of the comments were critical all 3 residents had 4 comments critical of the proposal that charge the residents a toll and expressed concern of lack of affordability and residence by the way, were the only resident to comment i heard you talk about the affordability i assume you know that the average transportation spending of protecting resident due to the toll nearly double by build out that slide was in our presentation page 29 represent a graph but i understand how the timma missed this hesitate only the the screen for 20 minutes curiously in the grant i think it is responsible for you so im skiio approve those toll policies that double our transportation costs and specifically i demand you make all residents the villages exempt from this toll for 61 percent of villages household that have own or have access to a vehicle this tolls a huge increase and as constructive evictions and net profits comprise half of tida budget 80 million we pay for the ti project incidentally a Million Dollars to timma thats our rent money i dont need you to be remind the average to the income is ti households was that 5,000 obviously you must i present our looking for other funds for the ti project and instead of seeking nor money from the low income and middleincome people but i appreciate and ask you that you do not vote to double our transportation cots and exempt all residents from villages of the vinyls from this toll thank you. Thank you, mr. Kline there any additional Public Comment . Seeing none, Public Comment is closed. Board Community Members Board Members excuse me any comments on this item again, i do want to thank the staff timma and the Transportation Authority as well as the Treasure Island Development Authority for the work on the Mobility Plan and to fill out the robust Transportation Program for current and New Residence of this island i i feel comfortable with the goals with the hours and pricing have not been set yet and will be over the next two years will be taking in more input from the residents as well as continuing the dialogue on this process i feel comfortable and take this item same house, same call . Mr. Clerk, call item number 9 and 10 together and item 9 introduction of new items and 10 general Public Comment. Are there any new items from Board Members today . Seeing none, well open up for Public Comment on item 9 and general Public Comment as well. Thank you good morning, commissioners andrew of chinatown officer of mighty virtue one will defend one policies of humanity and justice for the holy people political leaders and serves the society with loyalty and encourage on all good deeds with great virtues for the model of all of selfnature and preservation one follows the guidance of 20 between you principles to develop the apology for the divided missionary and takes a course of action with uprightness and integrity for the qualities of the leaders so one da can rescue being a perfect model and leader one coloration and progress could direct others to take on poverties in the same fashion of loyalty and courage and one can help the people to the outer state of peace of wellness and contentions oneself to use one genius for the good of mankind and cures for disease this is a good way to rescue the people from tragedies thank you. Thank you next comment commenter please. Thank you, again, for hearing any comments commissioners jeff kline for the record im opposed to the because it the mistaken assumption the planners are ignored the shift to transit and away from private vehicles by the residents of the Treasure Island during the past 8 years this shift is due entirely to the muni bus service corresponding to the 2009 Transportation Plan one hundred