tv [untitled] July 4, 2015 10:00am-10:31am PDT
my left is supervisor kim. i would like to recognize [inaudible] who will be working with us helping by televising this committee meeting at sf gov tv. madam clerk any announcements? >> yes silence [inaudible] be included as part of the file [inaudible] will appear on the july 7th supervisor agenda unless otherwise stated >> thank you very much. could you please call item 1 >> resolution authrising [inaudible] city owned parcel for dogpatch and north west potrero hill >> this is a follow up item for sth intent from the cities first green benefit in dogpatch and north west potrero hill approved by the board a few weeks ago. as a standard with the formation of a community
benefit district and benefit improvement this resolution allows the mayor to cast ballots for the city owned parcels located in the assessment district boundaries. my office worked with the sit a departments in the [inaudible] boundaries over the last few months including the real estate, reck and park, mta whos board will be taking action separately next week as well as dp w. we have with us mr. jonathan goldburg to present additional detail on this item >> goon afternoon mr. goldburg >> my name is jonathan goldburg and i'm the green benefit aproject manager with public works and here to pent on a resolution for the mayor to cast ballots in the afirmative
under the jurisdiction of board pr visors. there is one department of real estate parcel which is the former south east police station, 5 parcels under the jurisdiction of public works. they are left over of the public right of way and one rec and park policyal. on june 19, 2015 the board of supervisors unanimously approved the resolution of the cities first green benefit district. this initiated the ballot process which were sent out june 12. of the 7 parcels under the jurisdiction of the board of supervisors the adoption of the resolution will allow for the mayor to cast votes in the affirmative for the 7 city parcels within the green benefit district.
>> is that it? >> that's it >> perfect. short and sweet and to the point. thank you for the presentation. let's take public comment on the item? seeing there is no member of the public to comment public comment is closed. colleagues do you have questions? seeing no questions-supervisor kim made a motion to move forward with a positive recommendation and second by supervisor wiener. the motion passes unanimously. madam clerk will you call item 2 >> resolution authraising [inaudible] city owned parcel for yerba buena district >> i'll ditto everything you said for item 1 accept this is for the yerba buena benefit
district which is around already and this is the renewal. successful cbd that has done a amazing job of improving and beautifuliing the neighborhood and building a nirebd yoift that involved building a coalition of the businesses, hotels, residential tenets and home owners as well as small businesses. >> thank you, is there a presentation? no. >> good afternoon, my name is chris corbs and project manager with office of economic worse force development. authorizing the mayor to cast ballot in affirmative. 8 parcels with the board of supervisors has
jurisdiction. known as the yerba buena community benefit district. the board of supervisors june 9 passed a [inaudible] thereby nishiating the balloting process. june 12, 2015 department [inaudible] with 8 ballots being sent to the city and county of san francisco. the city could vote on the parcel if the board of supervisors approve the resolution. a list of the parcels is attached. fl is a total assessment of 102, 386, 00. if you have questions myself or my manager [inaudible] can answer questions. thank you >> thank you. seeing there are no questions let's take public comment on item 2. public comment is open.
>> can i get a little bit of some--[inaudible] i just want to show something. i'm not here to impress on the city and county of san francisco. the city by the bay. they claim they know how to do the thing. listen, i'm really appalled. >> sir please keep your comments to item 2 >> just give me a chance [inaudible] i'm up here speaking on the cbd and what is happening in the lan use in the fillmore supervisor cohen. or whatever we call the fill no mo. you need to pay attention to what is happening there so you don't to repeat on
[inaudible] what they have done to fillmore. my name is ace and want to the city and county to know i'm on the case. i'm getting ready to retire as a activist because i'm growing foo hold to come up and speak 3 minutes and be disrespected. i'm up here speaking in the parallel with land use. cbd, western addition and fillmore. we don't have cbd or leadership, we don't have anything but evaluation and corruptness and all these other things. i'm going to slow down because i'm not a activist but i do appreciate respect because i'm been here more than anyone in the room and plan to be here for the rest of my life. my name is ace and i'm on the case and what i say is open up your ears, don't have no fear. all i'm troying to tell you now and the sit ay and couny should be
ashamedism we are celebrating all the civil rights that is going on but we as african americans are still in the back. you can't attack what i'm about to say >> thank you. are there any other members of the public that would like to speak? seeing none public comment is closed. is there a motion for this? >> i would like to move this forward with recommendation >> motion may by supervisor kim and second by supervisor wiener. a positive recommendation. without objection that motion is sustained . thank you. madam clerk, could you please call item 3 >> item number 3 is a resolution authorizing [inaudible] city owned parcel improvement district greater [inaudible] community district
>> thank you. supervisor kim is also the item of-author of item 3 >> this is identical to items 1 and 2 as well and on this item we have [inaudible] presenting. or not. >> good afternoon madam chair and supervisor wiener and chair. chris gargs and [inaudible] here today to present on a resolution authrising the mayor to cast a assessment ballot in a-term fv on the satey and county of san francisco as a owner of one parcel of property subject to assessment in business improvement district to be named the greater [inaudible] the board of supervisors june 9, 20 passed a resolution to [inaudible] community benefit district and there been nishiating the ballot process. june 12, department of
elication mailed ballot to the proposed district with one ballot being sent to the sate and county of san francisco. the sate can vote on the parcel. a list of the parcel is attached. the one parcel has a total assess of 318,.13 cent. if you have questions on the ballots or the proposed resolution i or my manager [inaudible] can consider questions. thank you >> supervisor kim any last remark snz let's take public comment on item 3. public comment is open >> thank god for public comment. i have been doing public comment for 25 years. i'm retiring from that plat form but i'm talkic about cbd. the parallel is you will speak on the western addition what i call the fillmore. i'm up here
to testify. i'm not lying because in july i don't want to hear lies from the mayors office to the janitors office. we are in a state of emergency right here in san francisco. anybody think it is peaches and roses. but there is another story that must be told. now, right now all these cbd's are working all over the community. everything starts in the western addition, the fillmore. we call it the fill no more. the rich history of the city starts in the western addition. goes back to after the earthquake. what i say is i show a parallel. why isn't there a cbd in the fillmore? why isn't there all these lex yaez. we have the mayor election office in the fillmore right in the heart where he
came 34 years ago and all the black businesses he visited are closed right now. that is a fact. did know that? my name is ace and i'm on the case. you haven't seen me in a while for' me. i'm see furious. i'm appalled of the next item coming up. i had to speak here because the seconds were there. forgive me for speaking directly. my name is ace and-we are in a a92 new era. i have no time for errors >> are there members of the public that would like to speak on this item? seeing none public comment is closed at the time. a s there a motion for this? i would like to move this forward with recommendation. motion made by
supervisor kim to move with a positive recommendation. seeing no objection this motion passes without objection. madam clerk could you call item 4 and 5 together? >> yes, item number 4 is a ordinance amending the planning and zoning map to establish [inaudible] commercial transit district and [inaudible] >> thank you. supervisor breed is the author of these 2 item squz believe her aid coner johnston is here to make a presentation skn then we'll also hear from planning staff after mr. johnstons presentation >> coner johnston legislative aid to supervisor breed. the 2 pieces are follow ubledgeivation to fillmore and divisadero ncd's supported by the planning commission in june
2013 and passed this committee in 2014 and the bos passed them and became efecktdive in december. the divisadero runs 12 blocks from haight at the south to [inaudible] the fillmore runs 9 blocks from mu calster at the south and bush to the north. the ncd allow [inaudible] diverse modes of transit and invite active and appealing architecture and create a frame work. they are a important part of divisadero and fillmore long term plans to create vibrant cor drbs. all the legislation today does is remove the parcel based controls. to emphasize that point i'll read the operative sentence . density will be
restricted by envelope control by height, [inaudible] all other applicable controls of this and other codes as well as applicable design guides and applicable developments and rareia plan and design review. curltly divisadero limits 1 [inaudible] for regular housing and one bedroom for 275 square feet of lot area for group housing. fillmore limits dwelling to 1 unit per 600 square feet and one bedroom for [inaudible] those controls are outdated in in the 2007 [inaudible] including rto and several new nct, the soma, mission street, ocean avenue and glin park nct. the legislation gives people to
build unit without change thg sides or appearance of buildings or the characteristic of the neighborhood. required to provide at least 40 percent 2 bedrooms or 30 percent 3 bedrooms and a existing unit can only be divided if it exceeds 2 houn square feet or more than 3 bedrooms or at least 2 bedrooms and [inaudible] this won't cause a avalanche of microunits. far from it. the sit a doesn't have more lands so must accommodate without impacting neighborhoods. divisadero and fillmore are major cor doors so it is logical to provide it here. the ordinances are small measure to address the housing affordability crisis and allow fillmore [inaudible]. i want to thank tom rudual vich the
[inaudible] for all the work he did on the ordinances. we have incorporated the recommended changes including fwo clerical correction jz one minor exempention the lot merger for nct. with that i'm happy to answer questions. any questions colleagues? no. okay. >> good afternoon errhine star planning department staff. before you are 2 separate ordinances to rezone fillmore and divisadero district. the rezoning would mainly effect how density is calculated. fillmore as ratio on 1 to 600 and divisadero is 1 to 800.
this removes the [inaudible] in the planning code. in addition the fillmore ordinance rezones one property that [inaudible] one property that is zoned rm 3 and one rh 3 to fillmore street nct. no other land use controlerize changed. the planning commission herds these 2 items and voted to recommend approval with recommendation of both ordinances. the recommendation of fillmore is include rezoning of 2 [inaudible] nc 1 recommended to be chaivl today rto. and a add the lot merger restrictions to nct district for 121.7. the recommended modifications for divisadero is add the lot merger restrictions. [inaudible] i understand supervisor breed [inaudible] and we thank supervisor breed
if doing that and that conclude my remarks. thank you >> supervisor kim >> thank you. i just have a couple of questions. first, only because some of this had been in effect for many decades prior, i was wondering historically what was the thinking behind setting the minimums for dwelling units that were put into place? >> that is a good question. i think it was a way to restrict density so neighborhoods didn't become over crowded but what we find is we piled on so many restrictions density controls are a little irrelevant. you can only go up so high, you have to have so much yard and every unit needs exposure so that controls it. >> could you remine me if in the nct there is a requirement
of parking? >> no there is no. fillmore and divisadero do not have parking requirements. that was done when they were created last year >> my final question is how many soft sites are there along these 2 corridors that are developable? >> i believe we did, i don't have the exact number. these 2 corridors didn't have that many from my recollection >> i'm curious and think this is-i support this and glad we are moving forward. i think it is good to have density on these 2 corridors, they tend to be transit rich and could absorb that density so happy to see presents breed is looking at the amendments. there is already a lot of development already built on these 2
corridors >> divisadero is built up but the lots be29 fillmore and oak there is potential there and did get a proposal for those lots >> great thank you >> supervisor wiener-mr. star >> i have a comment. i just want to thank president breed for bringing forward this legislation and creating both new nct in district 8 we did something similar in glen park and also on upper market and it is long overdo. we know that one key aspect of meeting our cities dramatic and profound housing shortage is to make sure that we are putting housing on transit corridors
and so whether it is glen park or upper market or divisadero or fillmore where we have strong transit access that is where we need to put new housing. and having this somewhat outidated approach to maximum unit density, it makes sense to move beyond that so i'm very supportive of this legislation >> thank you. let's take public comment on this item? any member of the public that would like to comment on items 4 and 5 please come up >> this is really cumber some i have to take time out of my busy schedule. i get this second hand information. what is going on here? usual
business. i'm appalled but i won't say anything bad about any supervisors on here but this is appalling. how in the hell do you think who ever put this legislation together that without community input you sit up here and think it is good. have you been to the fillmore lately? have you been to the addition and [inaudible] have you been to rosa parks where we have violations of contractors that don't give a dam n about us. i go to the streets and they look at me like i'm a peon because there is no voice. dam, it after the first there is a voice. washington post, california is a voice for today but with vision for tomorrow. i'm not saying i'm for or against this because i don't know nothing about it and that is the problem. the community don't know nothing about it. i
was there in the creation of the cbd and all these things in the fillmore. you better wake up in listen. people that are in my community that call themselves legislatures. it is called community reform. that is how we put legislation together and find out what the community wants. you are looking at me like i'm crazy. [inaudible] i would say the rest of it but it don't go good at city hall. you get so silly because- >> any member thofz public that would like to speak on this item? seeing none public comment is closed. thank you. staff thank you for your presentation. is there a
motion we could entertain a motion- >> motion to move forward with recommendation on item 4 and 5 >> without objection this motion passes. thank you. madam clerk is there any other items for us today? >> there is no further business for the committee. >> there is no further business this meeting is now adjourned. thank you.