Our clerk is erica major who is delighted she will not see us for the next month. Do you have any announcements. I guess sf gov tv has to run the title. Okay, there is no fine for this. Do they have to run the title . Please make sure to silence all cell phones on electronic devices. Replace speaker cards and any documents to be submitted to the clerk. [reading notes] item number 1, 180777, ordinane amending the planning code to require a conditional use authorization for employee cafeterias, as defined, within office space, except for existing employee cafeterias; affirming the planning departments determination under the California Environmental quality act; making findings of consistency with the general plan and the eight priority policies of planning code, section 101. 1; and adopting findings of public necessity, convenience, and welfare under planning code, section 302. We had to make some amendments i had to set for one week. Anything you would like to add about this legislation . Clerk just to reiterate that we were to considerable amount of time with all of the stakeholders in i feel like weve got most i think we are in good shape. It is an honor to be your cosponsor. Does mr. Sanchez, nothing from planning, is there any Public Comments on item number one . Seeing none. Public comment is closed. If there is no objections, we will finally send this to the full board with a recommendation , without objection. Madame clerk would you please read the next item . Item number 2, 190702,e amending the planning code to permit new floor area or building volume on the rooftop of a noncomplying structure that is designated as a significant building under planning code, article 11, located on assessors parcel block no. 3707, provided that the rooftop has an existing parapet at least 17 feet in height along the primary building frontage; affirming the planning departments determination under the California Environmental quality act; making findings of consistency with the general plan, and the eight priority policies of planning code, section 101. 1; and making findings of public necessity, convenience, and welfare under planning code, section 302. This is a sitespecific piece of legislation. I authored a very similar one, a few years ago for a rooftop terrace on an article article 11 designated building. This is the same for the first building, which is undergoing, the subject of a renovation to a hotel that preserves the significant features, it has gone before the Historic Preservation commission which recommended i believe unanimously. On behalf of the department. Good afternoon. Planning department staff. Item number two before and as an ordinance. A floor area or building volume on the rooftop of a noncomplying structure at five jik third street. It will confer office space into a Tourist Hotel on the first 12 floors and demolish the existing top structure. The project would maintain approximately 11,000 square feet of retail use of the basement and ground floors. The Historic Preservation commission presented this item on march 20. The Planning Commission heard this item on april 25, 2019. During both hearings the commissions recommended approval of the ordinance. This concludes my presentation. I am available for questions. Are there any members of the public you would like to speak to item number two . Sounds like a good plan. I want to caution you about these rooftops. Rooftops are not made for weight , for entertainment, and the use of putting a lot of weight on top of them. In the event that the roof is not calculated to be Strong Enough to carry excess weight, you are putting the lower level section of the building at risk for collapse. I think you should do engineering measurement, and pressure test on that structure before you start adding a ton of weight on top of any building that you want to perform this type of noncompliance structure design. Thank you, mr. Wright. I will just say, for the record, that there actually rooftop structures there now, and the proposed rooftop structure is very modest, mostly consists of a canopy. This is just to allow that use on the rooftop on an article 11 building. The floor is yours ms. Gomez. Good afternoon supervisors. Weve come to the Planning Commission, and various subcommittees, for the past several years with regard to this project. We have a longstanding relationship and a very productive collaborative relationship with the developers of this project. They have proactively come to us early, early on and signed agreements that would ensure thats whatever workers are employed at this hotel, including who served drinks, or beverages on the rooftop bar will have a fair process. Its very important to us, and for that reason we have continued to support this project. We are asking for approval with regard to the rooftop to be presented today. If you have any questions, please feel free to get in touch. Next speaker, please. Connie ford from the good jobs for our program. I am here to proudly say, about 1. 5 hours ago we finished our negotiations with the developer, and actually i have to sign it, i have not signed it yet. We are very happy with it. We are trying to keep all of this development that is happening in our city accountable. In serving the needs of disadvantage communication is a barrier to get these in a level jobs and all of this good development, particularly. We are working really hard, we are really happy and we are here to recommend that this go forward and we look forward to working with jama ventures on establishing the program that we are talking about. Thank you so much. Congratulations. Any other members of the public here on item number two. Seeing none, Public Comment is closed. Supervisor haney, this is an district number six, the. Supervisor haney thank you. I was really excited to hear that there was such strong collaboration from a very early stage on this project. Folks from local 2, ms. Gomez on ms. Ford from the good jobs for all coalition. Im glad there was able to be, all of the development that is taking place, whether its hotels, housing court, or commercial space. We want to make sure that those are available to the people in community. They are good jobs. The developers are investing in training on the front and. Im very happy that we were able to come to an agreement on this project. Im also excited about the rooftop, i think rooftops are great in San Francisco. Rooftops have gone up very successfully on rooftops. Not just putting a lot of people to work on i think its good for Tourism Industry and generally for economic developments. I am excited about this project. Im very happy and thankful to this developer and the folks in the community for coming together for an agreement. There are some minor, technical amendments. Some of the existing text in the code has sons headed, we have drafted the no amendments to add that text back in. It looks like a big amendment, but its actually just replacing existing text with the same language. If i may, having just read this for the first time, and i think i was actually the author of the previous text that did sunset for a similar project that was never built. The language sons headed sun set. You change it to 5 third street. Is there a reason, are you just doing that in the short title so people know where it is . That is right. I am not sure whether that short title change was recommended by the Clerks Office or by someone in my office. Yes, that is the purpose of the short title change. Supervisor peskin in so far that there is nothing in here that correlates the short title to the long title, either in the short title it should say 5 third street for assessors parcel block 3707, or in the long title it should say 5 third street. The two so far do not cross reference each other. Fairpoint. We can make the change to the long title to reflect the address. Thank you. Sorry for being such a nit picker. This is not substantial. All right, we have had Public Comment. Supervisor haney, would you like to make a motion to adopt the amendments described . Supervisor haney forward as amended. Supervisor peskin we will take the amendments and send the item with a recommendation to the full board of supervisors without objection. Madame clerk could you read the next item. Item number 3, 190594,e amending the planning code to revise the zoning control tables of the chinatown mixed use districts to make them consistent with those in articles 2 and 7, to apply the use definitions in section 102, to set an abandonment period for use size maximums, and to allow general entertainment and nighttime entertainment uses with conditional use authorization; affirming the planning departments determination under the California Environmental quality act; making findings of consistency with the general plan, and the eight priority policies of planning code, section 101. 1; and adopting findings of public necessity, convenience, and welfare under supervisor peskin colleagues , this is part of aarons stars favorite job, and life mission to reorganize the code and they have now gotten to article eight , in the chinatown mixeduse districts. This is similar to a number of other pieces of legislation that mr. Starr has brought, and the commission has recommended in this case. I believe it was unanimous recommendation on may 9 of this year. I do have one very minor addition, which i believe staff is aware of, and i will talk to you about in a minute. But first, i would like to give mr. Starr the opportunity to regale us with his lifes work. Thank you, supervisor, i like to think of it as my elbows. Aaron starr, manager of legislative affairs, this is part three of the code reorganization project. It brings consistency to the code by consolidating all use the definitions in the code and standardizing these control table formats. This phase focuses on chinatown. The first phase focused on article two which include our residential pdr and downtown Zoning Districts. The second one focused on zoning seven. The next phase and final phase will reformat the remainder of article eight. Supervisor haney, i will be coming after you next. Which includes our easter neighborhoods district. I would just like to note that the new Zoning District that was created by central selma uses a centralized definition of format. The commission heard this item on may 9 and recommended two of approve. We do have one proposed amendment today. Supervisor peskin which was discussed by the commission and does not require re referral . It narrows what the commission approve so it does not need a throwback. Supervisor peskin before we open it up for Public Comments, i want to explain to my colleagues, and the public, what that small amendment does on page three, which is to accept from the maximum use size abandonment provision, a change of use for legacy business or institutional use, or legacy business or institutional use after after the abandonment timeframe. That is set forth on page three. With that, why dont we open this up to Public Comment. First speaker, please. This is a good way for me to get my point across to you. I want all of you to pay close attention to this. You set rules and regulations that gives preferential treatment to yourselves, and people in the same income brackets as yourselves. You have a redevelopment rule that says 15 of all brandnew housing, is supposed to be for low income, very low income, and moderate households. You have the audacity to talk about the homeless issue, act like you want to help. By the same response, peskin, even you when you point out your proposal, pertaining to the congestion in San Francisco, you include the homeless in your conversation to try to make it act like your proposal is going to help the homeless situation. Those two apartment buildings in your broadway district, okay, you are not including the most Vulnerable People that is homeless out in the street. You said the lowest income at 30 of the ami scale. That means everybodys income that is below 30 , is not included in the housing opportunity. But, you still want to administer rules and regulations that you want to enforce, and follow, to benefit people that is in the same damn income bracket as yourselves, and personal god damn friends to yourselves. Youre a bigot. You are. All three of you. You sit up there and act like you are concerned, but you are not. If another center is not a solution to the homeless problem, why are you doing it . A 400 million a year is not a solution to the homeless problem, why are you spending that per year . It is called professional stupidity, and you dont give a damn. That is why you have so many god damn Homeless People out in the streets. Then you give multibilliondollar Tax Companies multibilliondollar tax breaks and talk about you giving them a break. With regard to item number 3, welcome. Good afternoon, supervisors. My name is roy chan, Chinatown CommunityDeveloper First off i want to acknowledge aaron starr and a planning staff for working closely with our organization and with supervisor peskins staff, this past year, on this project to ensure consistency with the originally intended projections of the chinatown zoning adopted in 1987. This zoning as you know, has been vital in preserving chinatown neighborhood character by keeping highrise developments from displacing residents, Small Businesses and shadowing our parks. This process has been really important and thorough. I want to recap the rationale for the amendments that we requested in the chinatown visitor free. The first change responds to feedback we have been hearing from chinatown business entrepreneurs by the codes restriction that requires entertainment used be tied to an existing restaurant. The proposed change in this ordinance would remove this requirement and instead make entertainment use conditional. With that said, to continue ensure that large nightclubs and other largescale uses, when there is a change of use in a nonconforming structure. The only exception we believe should be allowable, is the proposed use of the institutional, or legacy business status. With that, thank you for your time and your support to move this to the next process. Thank you for working with mr. Starr, and the community and for those suggestions that you made to the commission, and thank you mr. Starr and the commission for adopting them. Are there any other members of the public who would like to testify on this item . Public comment is closed. I would like to move the amendment. We will take that without objection and send the item, as amended and come into the board with recommendation without objection. Mr. Starr, you will not be hearing from any of us for the next month. Supervisor safai you might hear from. Madame clerk can you read the fourth and final item. Item number 4, 190477,g to receive a report from the San FranciscoPublic Utilities commission on options for improving electric service through acquisition, construction, or completion of Public Utilities, pursuant to resolution no. 17419, adopted april 9, 2019, and in accordance with charter, section 16. 101; and requesting the San FranciscoPublic Utilities commission to report. Supervisor peskin thank you. I would like to first acknowledge the great work of the San Francisco puc. I always break for station identification and say not the california Public Utilities commission, very Different Organization that actually is trying to do the right thing for the people of the city and county of San Francisco. As we all know, this has been the subject of many hearings, many resolutions, and a lot of work and the expenditure of a bunch of money to get this project on its way. It is a longheld desire that was in the old days held by some, not by all. In recent times is now, i think held by every one of the 11 members of this body and the chief executive officer, our mayor, london breed. We are all marching in the same direction although there may be some other parties that are not marching along with us. I would like to, first of all, acknowledge and think the general manager of the San FranciscoPublic Utilities commission. The assistant agm, ms. Barbara hale from our power enterprise for your work. I would be remiss if i did not acknowledge Teresa Mueller from the city attorneys office. There are many other people i could acknowledge including my colleague, hilary ronan who wanted to be with us this afternoon. Unfortunately got stuck somewhere outside of San Francisco. With that, why do we turn it over to ms. Hale to regale us with a good, the bad, and the ugly and the aspirational vision that we all share. Hold on one second. Supervisor haney . Supervisor haney i have a statement that supervisor ronen asked me to read. She had to be in los angeles to be at the swearing in of her friend, lily garcia, and she asked me to share these brief remarks. These are her words. I am relieved we are here today to take the next step to ensure we have a, affordable and Energy System in San Francisco. Making it clear that pg e is a wreck. The chronicle reported that the preparation itself and some of its employees could be soon facing manslaughter, or murder charges for last years fires are yet while the court rejected a request for ratepayers to have any voice in pg es vagrancy negotiations, but continue to battle for control between pg es stockholders on potential hedge fund adventures, and surely the customers come last. What we are seeing is the inevitable outcome of having